Ablognormal

The Fallacy of Aggregating Experiences

2011-08-12T13:15:00.001-04:00

A cursory observation of the busy streets of New York would reveal a multitude of satisfied people going about their rather enjoyable lives. Everyone seems to have places to see and people to meet, and most people seem to be comfortable with their fortunes. Though one would occasionally notice a beggar sitting on the floor, a blind man calling for help, or a vagrant missing a limb, these few outliers are not numerous enough to substantially reduce the average standard of living. Reports of tragedy frequently sprinkle the radio waves, but the volume of these adverse occurrences pale in comparison to those reported in the annals of history. When the modernized world is taken as a whole it is quite clear that people living in the twenty first century are living far better lives than those of their ancestors.

Making a comparison between the standard of living from one generation to another or from one population to another requires zooming out of individual biographies and instead observing the panorama of collective experiences. Selecting one individual from each population would not be sufficient to fulfill the purpose of collective comparison. It would be possible that those randomly chosen individuals would not be a fair representation of the rest of people. Therefore, large pools of people must be gathered, and special parameters and statistics must be calculated in order to gain insights into overall levels of well being. These numbers can then be compared with various populations and generations in order to glean valid conclusions. Essentially, for comparison purposes, it is the aggregate experiences that are important and not the individual ones.

Sampling and statistics generally follow the anecdotal observation that people are enjoying a far better standard of living today than ever before. However, although these sampling techniques work well to compare populations, the information gleaned may be misused, and result in false conclusions. The aggregate numbers seem to describe the aggregate feelings of populations. However, though aggregate feelings may look good on paper, they are never experienced in actuality. A population is not its own sentient being. Only the individual people can experience happiness or misery. Aggregating all the happiness or misery of a few people does not result in a more happy or more miserable population. Because the experience is localized to the individuals, it is not possible for a fantastic level of aggregate happiness or misery to be reached. Therefore, these aggregating techniques must be looked at as nothing more than calculations of the probability of any given individual being happy or miserable. A valid conclusion would give better odds for picking a person with a high standard of living out of a modern population than out of an ancient population. Though these conclusions are informative, they seem a lot less meaningful.

The fallacy of aggregating experiences is commonly used to compare populations and to evaluate tragedies. Economic indicators of prosperity are taken as signs that people are all happy, but economic indicators of recession are indicative of people that are all depressed. It is common to conclude that times of economic prosperity are better than times of economic slumber. One would often look back in the history books and pity those time periods of hardship and envy those periods of plentiful. But this conclusion is not valid. The population doesn't receive a dose of endorphins or feel a thrill of economic prosperity, and the economy is not crying when the unemployment rate climbs. Rather, individuals cheer when they close a deal, and workers sob when they lose their jobs. The probability of being in one state or another is effected by the population measures, but the individual experiences are still localized. People who close million dollar deals in the middle of recessions are no less elated than they would have been in the middle of an expansion. Similarly, homeless people are not interested if unemployment fell to near zero. Experiences of pleasure or misery are dependent on the conditions of the individuals. To consider aggregate data to be an experience of the population would be committing a fallacy.

The broad observation of standard of living may be useful for calculating probabilities, but it doesn't paint a picture of any aggregate feelings. The few individuals that live in abject poverty cannot be ignored. Their experience of frustration is no less real than the beggars of previous generations, and the prosperity of others doesn't average out their pain. The tragedies of lost loved ones reported in the news are no less painful for their relatives than those who witnessed mass murders in the past. Experience is in the minds of individuals, and experiences cannot be aggregated for better or for worse.

You Never Know

2011-06-02T02:26:00.003-04:00

The world is full of uncertainties. From little things like the weather to big things like the state of the economy, unpredictable circumstances surround us everywhere we go. Although we can't avoid uncertainties, we can develop an intuition with probabilities that can accompany logic in our quest to make the best possible decisions. We don't give up on logic altogether because it can't work a hundred percent of the time. Rather, we use logic to its limits and rely on our intuition for that shred of uncertainty that will never be completely removed.

An alternative to the preservation of logic for its limited use is the rejection of logical analysis entirely. Some people face the world as a completely chaotic and uncertain jumble, and instead of using their unsatisfactory reasoning skills they invoke the anti-logic or the logical suicide. Some take risky hobbies for ephemeral thrills without thought of the consequences, and others live unhealthy lifestyles giving no credence to medical research. Still others make minor uninformed decisions or buy into speculative investments. All of these people share the common underlying anti-logic: You never know. Although logic is a fine tool in places where it can yield a comprehensive solution, in cases of uncertainty it is completely useless. You can argue for years with all the logical reason the world has to offer, but no amount of solid logic can come close to denting the armor of this solid anti-logic. Whatever models you may construct and whatever statistics you may collect, in the end of the day you can never really know anything.

This most powerful form of anti-logic has presented itself on numerous occasions over the course of my life. I find that the temptation for me to fall prey to this motto is felt strongest when make decisions related to dating and investing. I frequently compare the decision of which girls to date to the decision of which companies to invest in. When I first hear of a girl that would be a potential match for me I usually have the same feeling as when I first discover an interesting company while browsing the Internet. In both of these situations I have absolutely no idea of what may come of these discoveries. Logical reasoning is waiting in the background, and the illogical exuberance races to the foreground. This girl may be the one for me. The share price of that company could triple by next year leaving me financially independent. I come very close to immediately offering a date to this girl, and I must hold myself back from throwing my hard earned money into this random stock. I must wait for some logic to gain control of the decision process.

After taking a deep breath I begin to think logically. I analyze each situation carefully. I peruse through the girls profile and I realize that she is older than me. This alone is not the end of the world, but I continue to realize potential problems. The girl seems judgemental, materialistic, overly spiritual, and demanding. She seems to have all the qualities of someone that I don't socialize with, and she describes her perfect spouse as someone who I clearly cannot relate to. My exuberance subsides and I am ready to disregard the idea in its entirety.

A similar mental path is taken regarding my potential investment opportunities. I start looking at the companies financials. I notice a P/E ratio of 50, a PEG ratio of 3.5, and profit margins of 5%. The company seems to operate in a highly competitive industry, and the company seems completely overpriced. The next company has its own problems. This one has a net loss, a declining share price, heavy competition, and a management that is falling apart. I have lots of money to invest and I am very eager to yield a large return on my investment. However, the logical circuits in my brain conclude that it is probably much wiser for me to save my money for another opportunity.

At this point my brain is teased by the powers of anti-logic. I am about to make a logically informed decision but something very powerful is holding me back. I can never be sure. I know many men who have married older women, and I may be misjudging this girls personality. I can't know for certain unless I go out with her. This may be the perfect girl for me, and I would be passing her up simply because I have some logical hypothesis. I might as well go out because I can never know for certain unless I do. Similarly, regarding my company under scrutiny, I may be passing up the investment of a lifetime. Many companies have gone from rags to riches overnight, and I can't be sure that this is not one of them. The company that seems overpriced may be valued that way for a reason. Its share price may continue going up. And that company that has a declining share price may be just about ready to start turning around. The management can be fixed and the margins can improve. Though all these things are counter intuitive, I can never really know where the stock price will go. After all the logical analysis is complete, I still may be passing up a great company. I might as well just buy a few shares in order not to feel bad when the company actually does succeed.

No matter how solid one's logical reasons are they can fall prey to the "you never really know" anti-logic. Though this feeling may seem compelling, it is very important to withstand its temptations. Once while tutoring a college student in statistics I mentioned about the improbable chances of winning the lottery. I clearly demonstrated that winning the lottery is basically impossible from a probability perspective, and if one is willing to buy a ticket for the one in a million chance of actually winning, the same person should avoid driving a car because of the one in a million chance of it being picked up by a tornado. Though I made the point very clearly, the student was convinced that winning the lottery was still a possibility. Though it may be incredibly improbable, those who created the lottery have tapped into our inner anti-logic. You can only know for certain that you won't win if you don't play the game. But if you have nothing more than a one in a million chance of winning, it may still be worth a shot because in the end of the day, no matter how logical something may sound, you never know.

It's Not Fair!

2011-05-22T18:37:00.004-04:00

Though many of us may start life with the ideal that all people are equal, I doubt few of us were fortunate enough to graduate first grade still holding on to such a naive approach to life. Upon being subjected to the basic misfortunes that we all learn to live with, most of us begin to realize that life is just not fair. Some people seem to always have the best of fortune and other people seem to be dealt a bad hand of cards. Most of us would suggest that a fair world would be the ideal kind, but in reality, for whatever reason, the demons of injustice seem to have the ball in their court. However, closer examination suggests that the nature of our world is a perfect reflection of what most people honestly consider ideal.

Though most people seem to espouse the idea of all people being equal, it seems highly unlikely for even one person to actually feel this way on a personal level. The spreading of all the pleasures and sorrows of life in a perfectly fair manner may objectively seem like a worthy goal. However, how many people live in the world of the objective? Looking at the world through the glasses of anything other than a human being can lead to false and deceptive conclusions. Ideals must be thought of in the context of a subjective human experience if they are to relate to reality in a truthful and pragmatic manner. Don't look at the world as a large reality that happens to be populated with humans, and instead think of the world as the frame of reference for a given individual human. With a purely subjective and human observation of the world it seems obvious to me that a fair and even spread of life's assets is quite far from what is considered ideal.

An exercise in subjectivity reveals the fallacy of this parity. Put yourself in your own shoes for a few minutes, and think if you would prefer if all people would be equal. Imagine yourself winning the lottery, and think of all the work that other people can do in order to partake in your prize. You can walk through the streets of the city and browse the sites of the web while exercising your debit card in a purchasing frenzy, and others are toiling for their bread by supporting your every whim. Does this reality of yours sound fair? I don't believe it does. But do you find it wrong? I don't believe you do. You probably think that the world is a big place and it's not that bad if one human has a free ride. If this is the case, where has your desire for a fair world gone? Apparently, a fair world takes second priority to a world where all of your wildest desires are satisfied. Your altruistic desire for the equality of people has dried up the second you have been dealt a load of fortune.

Now, instead of thinking of yourself as a lottery winner, think of yourself as an acquaintance of one. Someone who worked with you in the office has just hit a major jackpot. On the outside you are full of excitement for your colleague, but on the inside you are overflowing with envy. You play the lottery every week and he just happened to buy one with his extra change. It's not fair! If only life was fair. If only you could have won the lottery as well. But you realize that you don't wish for both of you to win the lottery. After all, if everyone won the lottery their would be no use in the money. You are upset because you would have preferred to win the lottery instead of him. The whole purpose for you to win the lottery would be for you to be able to sit back and relax while everyone continued working to satisfy your needs. You don't wish for the world to be a fair place. You only wish the world would be more unfair with results that treat you favorably.

With the proper perspective it becomes obvious why the world is naturally such an unfair place. In reality nobody really cares for a fair world. Though the unfortunate may lament the ills of an unfair world, they must realize that they by no means take what they say to heart. By playing the lottery they are acknowledging the fact that the ideal world is an unfair world. Though this world may bring many to misfortune, most people are willing to risk living in such a world as long as they are given the chance to be on the fortunate end. The unfair nature of life is nothing more than a reflection of the will of the human race.

How Did This Happen?

2011-05-20T17:59:00.004-04:00

What's with this?

Either the end of the world has finally arrived or Google finance is having some serious trouble.

Shidduch System vs. Job Market

2011-05-01T14:22:00.004-04:00

Nobody likes uncertain and disorderly systems. Humans are known to be risk averse, and people generally prefer one bird in the hand to two birds in the bush. However, when engaging in any sort of matching process, a sizable amount of nondeterministic randomness inevitably results. Although people tend to avoid situations that must lead to disorganized matching processes, such situations are unavoidable as they present themselves in the shidduch system and the job markets. It is the underlying nondeterminism in both of these processes which causes them to be such painful experiences for those who must endure them.

The purpose of the shidduch is to match an appropriate man with an appropriate women in order to hopefully lead to a successful marriage. There are many different venues for finding men and women of marriageable age, and many different kinds of matching techniques. After using the proper methods it is hoped that a match will result. Many people enter the process full of optimism, and they put their faith in their particular form of shidduch system. However, after months and years of failed attempts at finding a proper spouse, it is quite common to become disenchanted with shidduch methods. It is very normal to lambaste "the shidduch system" as a complete failure, and more often than not one will put forward a whole plethora of patches and tweaks that would likely be of benefit to the flawed process. Sometimes these supposedly constructive measures are carried out, but in most situations the disgruntled shidduch dater will just continue to moan for the duration of the process.

What ends up happening to the long-term shidduch daters? Of course those who are married within a few months of dating are considered great successes. In fact, those people don't give much thought to "the shidduch system" altogether, and they go about there daily lives pondering their next milestones. However, those who remain in the system too long become bitter and dejected, and they begin to loathe shidduchim in general. The longer they remain single the longer they ponder the ills of the system.

This process continues until some solution occurs. The first solution occurs when the person eventually finds his or her long awaited lifelong partner. At this point an interesting transformation takes place in the persons mind. Whether the system remains a soar memory of torture or if the system becomes a fond memory of character building, the shidduch system in the end of the day transforms into nothing more than an interesting memory. Given a few months, the topic will no longer enter the conscious mind. Another more pitiful solution occurs when the individual leaves the shidduch market. A decision is made that marriage is not worth the bother, and single life is a fine alternative to life as a couple. People such as these may become abject and crestfallen, or they may truly find comfort in their life altering choice. Either way, they will continue to display an antipathy for shidduchim, and will encourage people to find comfort in what on the outside seems to be a failure of a life. Given enough time, everyone exits the system and gives no more thought to how it can be improved. Passion moves on to the next agenda.

Although shidduch matching may seem like a very unique kind of process, it shows a striking resemblance to the job market. Like shidduchim, most people have an optimistic outlook while entering the employment search. A job resume is constructed in the same way a shidduch profile is created. And much like shidduchim the job market can take a serious toll on the mental health of job seekers. There are always those people who find jobs right out of college, and such people give little thought to the whole concept of employment search. But most people find themselves searching for months for the right job. Over time, the unemployed begin to lose hope in finding employment. Many people become depressed about the situation of the economy, and some even put forward methods for fixing the system.

What ends up happening with the unemployed? People who are unemployed for a long time become less and less convinced of ever finding a job. The longer they wait the more they detest the job market. But in the end of the day almost all of the unemployed become employed. Some people eventually find their dream job. To these people the job market rapidly becomes a distant memory. Other people take sub par jobs and continue to detest the job market. Still other people go back to school and develop new skills in order to find a new job. It is common to settle for a pay cut and lower one's standard of living as well. When all is said and done, the options are employment, disability, or death. Most people end up choosing employment from that short list of options.

The shidduch system and the job market are similar in a very fundamental way. Both of these systems represent a matching process. A direct result of this is nondeterministic randomness. This is a large source of anguish to human beings. We would prefer to see clear results from actions taken. But in both the shidduch system and the job market it is very common to find two people with identical resumes yielding completely different outcomes. This fundamental nature of these systems cannot be changed and no tweak in the system will make it fair. Those who succeed can either praise the system or ignore it, and those who fail will criticize the methods and occupy their minds with the topic. But there can be no fix to either of these nondeterministic random systems.

What can one do to prevent failure in the shidduch system? It seems that the situation is quite bleak for those who find themselves single at an older age. Many think they have a solution for the system, and others eventually give up trying altogether. However, the solution to the problem involves the main difference between the shidduch system and the job market. When a person fails in finding a shidduch he or she frequently blames the system, but when someone can't find a job he or she works on improving the probabilities. The solution to a personal shidduch crisis seems to be a matter of mathematics and probability. The people that find shidduchim within the first month of dating are very eligible shidduch material. They are usually normal people that may easily be set up with an equally normal mate. In theory, those who are most normal are compatible with the most people and will have the easiest time finding a shidduch. However, those who are unique for better of for worse will have a hard time finding an equally unique individual. There just happen to be fewer people that would be compatible with such a person. Similarly, in the job market there are people with marketable skills and there are people with very specific skills. Those who have the most marketable skills find a job the fastest while those with the more specific kind find themselves searching in a niche market.

Both the shidduch dater and the job seeker can increase their chances of finding what they want by becoming more marketable and less specific. The unemployed typically go back to school or settle for sub par work until they have what it takes to find a proper job. Those who have obsolete skills must learn new ones, and those with specific skills must learn some more universal ones. In this manner job seekers will almost always eventually find a job. A shidduch dater should be doing the same thing if he or she hopes to reduce the amount of time necessary to find a match. Becoming more marketable may mean improving ones appearance, social skills, or financial position to the point where they have reached the realm of normal people, or it may entail mingling with the lowly folks, eating fatty food, watching sports, or drinking beer in an attempt to lower ones self to the realm of normal people. Of course, the latter would involve a compromise comparable to those who settle for a sub par job. It may be necessary to give shidduch profiles to those who you would rather not ask for help from in the same way job seekers ask for job assistance from people they are normally uncomfortable approaching. Sometimes sacrifices must be made if one would like to increase the probabilities of successfully navigating through the shidduch system in a timely manner.

While such sacrifices are frequently made in the job market, people rarely feel like taking such measures while involved with shidduchim. People feel better blaming "the system" and not working on solving the problem. In the end of the day everyone needs food, and that is why people make the job market work. Although the same measures may be taken regarding the shidduch market, too many people see a single life as a plausible option, and they therefore choose the easy way out.

The shidduch system and the job market both suffer from the same fundamental problem. Any fix to the system would do nothing to change the underlying nature of the nondeterministic random process. Unique individuals, for better of for worse, will have a hard time finding an appropriate match. These people can spend a long time searching until they find the object of their dreams. However, both shidduch daters and job seekers have the opportunity of becoming more marketable individuals, and by doing that they can potentially decrease the amount of time in the matching market.

Chol Hamoed Pesach Trips - 2011

2011-04-24T17:17:00.019-04:00

Although this years Chol Hamoed Pesach had only one full week day, I still managed to fill every moment of the time I had with the traditional holiday adventures. In previous years, my brothers and I would make a point of visiting the same places, and we would find pleasure in following what resembles a sort of Chol Hamoed field trip seder. This traditional itinerary would allow us to find pleasures in the simple things of life, and it would also result in less of a heartache in deciding exactly which excursions would maximize our holiday spirit. Naturally, it is the pictures taken to document the journey that make the outings much more worthwhile.

I enjoy snapping photographs of scenic discoveries, and this year was no different than any other year. However, this year there were certain pictures that I had to have in order to feel as if I had fulfilled the Positive Commandment of enjoying my holiday of Pesach. Having concrete goals is very important, and it can save a lot of storage in both your camera and hard drive if you are certain of which pictures are absolutely necessary. On the first day of Chol Hamoed I woke up bright and early and my two younger brothers and I prepared the car for a ride to the Bronx Zoo. The Bronx Zoo is not one of our traditional Pesach points of interests, but it has been a long time since we had been there and my brother just happened to really want to go there for some unknown reason. I was not terribly excited to be in an outdoor park on a pretty chilly day, but with my camera in hand I was all eyes. Immediately upon arrival I began carefully observing and photographing the various animals in there various habitats. I was very busy taking pictures, and it didn't even occur to me at first that I was really looking at live wild animals that are rarely seen in New York City.

These tigers are really large and it looked really cool the way they seemed to engage in peaceful dialog.

Not all animals are as peaceful, and one of the most thrilling sights of the day was this bear fight. A true grizzly sight.

On a more beautiful note, we witnessed a peacock open up and show its true colors.

We also witnessed a gorilla stand upright like a human.

A last but not least, I believe this is the celebrity Egyptian Cobra that escaped the zoo a few weeks ago.

Although the Jews never returned to slavery in Egypt, this Egyptian Cobra (now named MIA by its fan club) was not as fortunate to remain free.

On the next day of Chol Hamoed we did not have much time to do anything exciting. I am assuming most people were probably at a loss when it came to fun ideas for a Friday afternoon. However, this is where the concept of traditional visits to holiday destinations came in handy. On the second day of Chol Hamoed I went with my father and my two younger brothers to visit our families favorite tree.

Although this may look like any ordinary tree, we have visited this amazingly cool climbing tree almost every single Pesach Chol Hamoed since I was about 11 years old. Aside from being an awesome tree, visiting this tree year after year has turned an ordinary walk in the park into an amazing adventure.

And finally, today we made our yearly trip to the annual international car show in New York City at the Jacob Javits Center. I am not extremely knowledgeable of cars, but this place is really worthy of an annual visit. I first took a look at some of the normal cars, and inspected all the various gadgets. It is interesting to see how many different ways it's possible to adjust a drivers seat. Once I felt as if I had been sitting in enough cars that I felt as if I was just hoping into a taxi, I made my way to the expensive and extravagant automobiles in order to have some fresh footage for this years trek.

Here are the cool and expensive Ferraris and Bugatti.

This was just some weird looking car that I found very amusing.

Almost every automobile manufacture at this year's show was demonstrating some kind of battery powered car or hybrid. Here is an example of a hybrid from Mitsubishi.

This was pretty cool. The car used in the Transformers movie.

And here is what we came to see: We caught a glimpse of the widely publicized Chevy Volt (an electric and gasoline car).

Today ends another great year of Chol Hamoed trips. I feel very accomplished with the photos that I have taken, and I think this has been a successful Chol Hamoed. I hope to have as much productivity on all subsequent years to come.

My New Gadget

2011-03-09T18:08:00.009-05:00

I have only recently become aware of all the cool gadgets that are available on Microsoft's latest version of Windows. Although I was not very impressed with the new version of Minesweeper, I have found the new picture puzzle gadget to be very entertaining. When I first started playing the game I was challenged with basic solving of the grid. However, after winning a few times I began to discover tricks and patterns. It didn't take long before I "solved the game" completely. But thanks to the good people at Microsoft, I have not been forsaken without a challenge. All I needed was a small timer placed on the top right corner of the gadget, and I have fulfilled my time wasting needs for years to come. Now I can continue to play this game in pursuit of my absolute best timing. This game may even take me as far as Minesweeper has, and I may even some day have the world record for having the fastest picture puzzling timing. Now I keep playing faster and faster, and I have already been able to solve the entire puzzle in only 20 seconds (see above). I was first a little worried about becoming too good too fast. If this challenge becomes either too easy or if beating my timing becomes completely impossible I might be encouraged to search for another hobby. However, I realized that even if I have reached my limit with the number format of the puzzle, I still have 10 other puzzle formats to chose from! The other puzzles are harder complicated pictures, and I haven't even been able to solve them completely yet. I am very excited about all of the years of challenges that lay ahead.

Decision Making

2011-02-27T09:12:00.011-05:00

If everyone was blessed with unlimited resources there would be no decision making challenges. However, the central economic problem known as scarcity results in having to make choices between different feasible packages of goods. If people can't have everything they must try to optimize their decision making in order to arrive at the maximum amount of pleasure possibly achieved with the given budget constraint. Though economists can produce fanciful equations with complicated mathematics describing the process with which the average folks engage in such decisions, they offer no practical advice on exactly which decisions are optimal in which situations. The result is my lack of confidence in what seems to be an impractical and irrational science, and a feeling of ambivalence and helplessness when faced with some challenging and mostly irrelevant decisions.

Since the days when I started playing with toys, I would categorize my behavior as decision making challenged. From the color lolly pop to the courses in college, I have always found it impossible to decide between various options. After giving my nature some serious thought I have concluded that there are two logical reasons for having trouble with making decisions. The first challenge with decision making is the lack of proper information available for coming to informed conclusions. With easy access to a logical and comprehensive list of correlations between various decisions and their definite outcomes, decision making would become a purely logical process, and choosing a college would be as simple as counting to ten. Since computers are very good at logical reasoning, and most people today have access to advanced computing machines, decision making could easily be outsourced to sophisticated software packages. However, the information necessary for such computations just doesn't exist. Economists deal with the lack of information by introducing more complicated mathematics and given probabilities. However, it seems obvious that the lack of information means a lack of probabilities as well, and adding such factors only leads to unnecessary complications. A result of this problem is the impossibility of making perfectly logical conclusions.

The second problem, although admittedly a minor one, is the fact that half of the decisions are irrelevant either way. When given five different lolly pops to chose from I may end up deciding on green. But I freely admit that if green was not available I would have no less pleasure from choosing purple. If two choices are basically the same it becomes extremely difficult to make a logical decision between them. Both of these problems cause an element of irrationality to characterize the decision process.

Although these problems may sound very petty, they can be very debilitating for extremely logical people. I myself always try to act and think in the most logical manner, and I can be caught up for hours on those "hard" decisions. What do I eat for dinner? What articles should I read? Which career path should I take? Which girls should I date? Who do I vote for? Whose weddings should I attend? All of these questions may seem reasonable, but I can occupy my mind for weeks with some of these without moving any closer to a logical decision. In the end of the day I usually end up deciding on a whim, and the time spent contemplating would usually end up wasted. The waste doesn't stem from these questions being unimportant. Many of these are extremely important decisions. However, it seems that there is rarely a strong correlation between the amount of time pondering and any positive results from the final conclusion. Some people consistently make sound decisions, and the positive outcomes are frequently attributed to the careful decisions they have made. However, even the biggest winners can be seen to make very poor decisions at times, and those are attributed to random unpredictable shocks. But no matter what the good fortune is attributed to, an element of randomness is always the final deciding factor. It is therefore necessary to develop techniques for streamlining the decision making process as much as possible in order to avoid the wasted time.

To lessen the amount of time wasted contemplating my choice of action, I have devised two solutions to the decision making problem. The first solution is the artificial preference creation or structured randomness. To solve my problems with contemplating decisions I can develop a list of preferences and store them in my memory for future references. Other people may subconsciously make use of this technique in order to solve their own decision problems. For example, sometimes when visiting a restaurant people will peruse the menu and draw faulty and illogical conclusions about unknown variables. Will the moo goo gai pan really taste worse than the chow mein? Often there are some real unknowns and decisions are frequently made by invoking artificial preferences. People who can do this subconsciously are blessed. Unfortunately, I really have very few preferences and I mostly couldn't care less about what I eat for lunch. In order to cut down on the wasted time making the decisions, I must train myself to prefer certain foods over others, certain subjects over others, certain people over others, and certain stocks over others. Once such preferences are stored in my memory I will easily decide on my best food, my choice of college courses, my people to associate with, and my stocks to invest in. No longer will I lack strong opinions. If the topic is contentious enough I will develop an opinion just for arguments sake. I can walk around praising Pepsi over Coke, and everyone will be aware of my decisions even before I make them. Although the opinions and preferences begin as artificial, eventually I will begin to believe myself, and decision time will be greatly reduced.

The second solution would be to act with completely arbitrary decision making or with pure randomness. In order to use this solution I must completely embrace the random nature of things. This would include always carrying around a quarter in my pocket to make the most efficiently random Bernoulli trials, and in circumstances with more than two choices I would have a handy pair of dice. On first thought it would seem that such an option is very foolish. Why would one want to intentionally act in a random manner? However it may sometimes pay to act in a completely random manner if it can lead to efficient decision making. When playing minesweeper and trying to achieve the best possible timing it is necessary to make the guesses as fast as possible. Some decisions are completely random, and thinking to much into them is a pure waste of time. However, with a completely random guess, one is bound to win 50% of the time. Similarly with many day to day irrelevant decisions, the efficiency gained with making a rapid decision may frequently outweigh any negative results the random decisions may bring.

Some decisions are easy and others are hard. Sometimes enough thought is all that is necessary to optimize the process of making choices. But more often than not, the decisions lead to arbitrary conclusions, and spending too much time contemplating can lead to wasted time. Although it is impossible to standardize the decision making process when there are too many decisions, some form of random process may be the best option when only dealing with a few possible choices.

Purchasing Practice

2011-02-15T22:48:00.010-05:00

I always considered buying a laptop computer, but whenever I would think of the various uses for such a machine I could never find that I had any real need for one. For years I had been able to survive on nothing more than food, clothing, and shelter, and the added entertainment value that a personal computer had to offer didn't seem to fit the criteria of a worthy purchase. Of course I was able to avoid a lot of purchases using this mentality, and I missed many opportunities for sharpening those dull skills of purchasing decision making. But now I had finally decided that it was time to have a laptop. The old family computer had finally died, and my father frequently had business to do with the new computer. Although I hadn't yet figured out any real need for it, I decided that I needed my own computer just because I needed it. It was now time for my rusty skills to be challenged with the task of choosing the right computer to purchase.

Because my purchasing history had been sprinkled with plenty of lost deals, overpriced junk, and outright scams, I was determined to apply plenty of due diligence before going through with my dream purchase. I did a google search and I started browsing through various computer sites. As usual, I was hit with hundreds of terms that were Greek to me, and with every additional search I became less and less confident in my finding the perfect laptop. My search started out very practical. I went to the Dell website and began building a computer in the same manner that I used to play with the configurations as a dreaming child. However, after putting in hours of thought, and coming to be determined to find the best possible deal, I began to think more and more on a philosophical level. How was it possible to find completely accurate and unbiased reviews of any product? If it were possible to find the best deal, all the other computers would never sell. I doubted and second guessed all the innate wisdom I had about computers, and I opened my mind to anything with buttons and a display. Eventually I realized that this search was becoming futile. Instead of searching on my own I would have to have some assistance.

Since I was having a lot of trouble working on this decision by myself I decided to seek some help from those with more shopping experience. I wondered how other people were able to make up their minds when confronted with the same thousands of different options that I was being presented with. Everyone seemed to have a laptop, and it didn't seem like much of a burden to consult the veterans of consumerism. I began asking everyone I knew about their computer purchasing history. I started with my good old normal friends and I worked my way up to the certified geeks. I was presented with various computers and equally varied reasons for purchasing those computers. Some said they found a computer refurbished on ebay for half the price it normally goes for, and others said they found the top of the line gaming computer with a special graphics card. Most people, however, admitted that they had no idea about computers, and they had only bought what other people had told them to buy. Some praised the computers that they themselves owned, and had nothing but unflattering comments for competing brands. Others seemed to praise every single computer for various different qualities. And then there were those geeks who would just speak above my head. It would have been nice to just ask one person and trust his opinion. However, my skepticism has a way of putting me in these situations. My consulting with people left me even more befuddled than I was while doing my own research. I was again beginning to doubt whether I really needed a computer.

Today I finally decided that I was going to buy a laptop without any further ambivalence. I had come home with nothing much to do and I was going to use the computer, but my father had business as usual. I decided to go to a computer store in person and let the wonderful sales staff influence my final decision. I hopped on the subway and headed to J & R Computer World. While waiting for the train I had a final discussion about this matter with my brother. I told him that I was leaning toward an HP, and as usual he said that a Sony would be much better. Although I was open to basically anything, my mind was dominated by that last influencing remark as I entered the store. I carefully looked at each and every laptop, and the kind salesperson was giving me little tidbits about the various features of each of them. When we arrived at the Sony laptops something was telling me that this was the time to make the purchase. I had a feeling that my mindset was a result of the most recent conversation that I had had with my brother. I knew that this purchase would be very impulsive, and although I wasn't really looking for anything in particular, I forced myself to formulate some random questions about the features of other computers. The computer was kind of expensive, but something told me that I was going to be impulsive and just take the computer that I last heard was considered good.

Before making the final decision, I asked the salesperson to give me some time to think about things. I didn't think this time would do anything for me, but I couldn't let myself fall into another random purchase. While fiddling around with some random features on the Sony, I received a call from a friend of mine who was nervous about taking an exam. I realized that he had told me all about his computer when I had asked him about his computing preferences. He had a Lenovo computer, and I remember asking him what he thought about it. Although he wanted to ask me questions about the exam, I briefly changed the subject and asked him what he felt about his computer again. After that phone call I asked the sales person to see the Lenovo computers. It turned out that a Lenovo computer with the same specs as the Sony was on sale for a much lower price. The salesperson told me that this computer was on sale for Valentine's Day, and it was the only one on sale of its kind. At that point I felt a feeling that I had never had before while making purchases. I felt the logical reasoning circuits of my brain begin to turn. The feeling was very good. I smiled and said that I would go with the Lenovo Z560.

The feeling of making a logical purchase was very new to me, and I felt very accomplished with my spiritual growth. The computer was cheap enough, and I was excited enough that I actually started to purchase some accessories along with my new toy. After finalizing the purchase and proceeding to pickup my merchandise, I began to feel a little uneasy about the decision that I had made. Was it really logical or was I impulsive again? When I came to pick up my item I was relieved to see that the customer in front of me was picking up the very same laptop. I realized that I must have been making a logical decision if other people were going for this deal as well. When I came home and started the computer I searched through ebay to see if I had really found a good deal. Sure enough, I had paid less for my computer than all of the ebay listings for the Lenovo Z560 with the sole exception of a refurbished product that was only $10 cheaper. I was very happy with my successful purchase, and after setting up the millions of different features and configurations, and overworking my brain with all of those both tedious and meaningless decisions, I found some time to type up my experience and share it with everyone.

Free Money!

2011-02-09T09:47:00.008-05:00

For some unknown reason, Chase Bank decided to start imposing a minimum balance for all free checking accounts. For someone who keeps all his money in the stock market, I naturally don't have an opportunity for keeping any large amounts of cash in the checking account at any given time. The checking account is only used when I must make big payments with checks, and I typically transfer the money from my brokerage account before I actually make the payment. Chase Bank was willing to let me keep the checking account with no minimum balances as long as I would use their debit card about six times a month. Although this sounded tempting, I have not used my debit card at all since I started using my credit card, and I knew that there was no way I would make that many purchases every month. Therefore, it was time to close the account and switch to Apple Saving Bank's truly free checking account with no strings attached.

Once I switched all my money to the new account it was time to establish new connections between the Apple Bank account and the other places where I might need to transfer money. I first went to my PayPal account and broke the connection with Chase. I had never even used the PayPal account, but I figured it may be a useful thing to have, and I have always connected my bank account with their site. I started the process of connecting the new account with PayPal. After completing all of the forms, I was requested to verify the account. I guess they needed to make sure that I was the true owner of that account. One option for verifying was to give PayPal all my bank login information and let them conduct an instant verification. Although I trusted PayPal wouldn't use my information in an improper manner, I ran into complications while trying to use the instant verification. The other verification option would take a few days to complete, but I found this method to be very interesting. To verify my account, PayPal would make two small deposits into my account and then test to see if I knew the exact amount. I thought this sounded interesting, and I chose that option before going about my business surfing other sites on the World Wide Web.

When I went to check out my Apple account a few days later I was a little surprised at what I saw. PayPal had lived up to their promise, and there in my new bank account was free money! The amount was very low, but I was a little amazed that this was actually happening. I didn't do anything but connect the accounts, and I had never even used PayPal to make purchases, and here they were giving me a generous donation. The story only started to sound even better when I tried to connect my brokerage account to the checking account as well. They had the same deal! It seems that there is a new fad with these online verifications, and some companies are really giving away free money. After a few days I noticed that the brokerage firm had given me more than twice the amount of money as PayPal. My winnings from online account connecting were beginning to pile up. I started to wonder how much money I could make doing this. For instance, what would prevent me from just breaking the connections each day and then reconnecting them a few days later? I could open many checking and savings accounts and connect them to many different brokerage accounts and PayPal accounts, and I would be able to earn a decent amount of free money all day long. I could write programs to automate the process, and I could borrow other people’s identities to generate exponential growth in profits. The profit margins are 100%. The money is free, and it is guaranteed.

On second thought, I think this process is starting to sound like a lot of work as it is. Like panhandling, this scheme is also just another way of working hard for small amounts of money. I think I would rather not quit my day job, or better yet, I think I should continue to search for a day job. But it is still cool to watch free money enter my account no matter how little. I have already made about 80 cents just from having a new bank account. Has anyone else made such a substantial amount with their new accounts?

Does your house have heat?

2011-02-01T23:13:00.006-05:00

Simultaneously satisfying the needs of many family members living under the same roof can be a very daunting task. Everyone has his or her own preferences regarding the indoor weather conditions, and although there is one thermostat that has the same number for the entire house, heat is rarely spread uniformly throughout living quarters. Additionally, the level of heat necessary for bodily comfort varies from one person to another as well. Since it is rarely possible to please everyone, members of the household must make compromises and sometimes knowingly sacrifice some personal comfort for the ideal goal of keeping the peace. To this end, I frequently endure below normal room temperatures during the winter months in order to accommodate those around me in the best way possible.

I generally do not have a large amount of sensitivity toward heat or cold. If there were to be a crowd of people in an uncomfortably hot room and the amount of time necessary for each one to actually notice the discomfort was then documented, I feel quite confident that my timing would definitely fall in the upper quartile. Some summer days have gone by in which the living room reached 80 degrees Fahrenheit before I even thought of turning on the air conditioner. Even during the dead of winter I can frequently be spotted taking a stroll without wearing a coat. However, even I can sometimes have preferences when dealing with the houses thermostat. When waking up early in the morning, placing my foot on a 60 degree floor is exponentially harder than placing my foot on a 75 degree floor. Also, keeping an empty stomach while trying to lose weight becomes much more difficult when residing in very cold climates. Although I am willing to bend my needs if it will help the comfort of others, the temperatures that I endure are probably far beyond the threshold of pain for your average folks.

Today I was sitting on the couch in the living room when I finally noticed that it was unusually cold. I told my father that my feet were freezing, and I thought it was a little cold in the room. My father informed me that I was correct, and that he had set the thermostat to 60 degrees. Because my parents room has much better insulation, and the idea that heat rises in general, the temperature that it can reach in there is generally much higher than that which is set on the thermostat. My father and younger brother both don't like the stuffy and hot feeling that is caused by an overworking heater. Since it had become very stuffy in his room during the previous night, my father decided to lower the heat just a drop. Apparently that extra drop in temperature had pushed beyond my tolerance level. I informed my father that this kind of weather in the outdoors would cause most people to wear spring jackets at least. My complaining paid off eventually, and the heat was raised to 62 degrees. Once the thermostat was adjusted and I actually heard the steam running, I assumed the room would soon be much warmer, and I was once again oblivious to the cold air in the room.

The House Is Alive!

2011-01-30T13:39:00.002-05:00

Is your house infected with icicles? As I take a stroll through the neighborhood I take notice of different icy growths on various houses. I notice that some homes have a very bad case of Ice Protrusion Syndrome, and other houses are completely healthy. Some houses have lots of little outbreaks, and others have a few three foot long monsters. The case of these home hives seems to vary from house to house. Whatever causes the large and dangerous variety has been infecting the front right corner of our house for some time now. With every snow storm it becomes bigger and bigger. Eventually it cracks and falls wreaking havoc on the ground below. Then a new one grows back in the very same place as its predecessor, and the destruction cycle continues. What makes one house covered in the icy infections and other houses completely immune to them? What can be done to cure one's house from this recurring menace?

The Intercom System

2011-01-28T12:54:00.005-05:00

As a child we were probably all told that it's wrong to talk to strangers. Children are defenseless and innocent, and parents always do their best to prevent them from being harmed. The best defense against potential assailants is to stay as far away from them as possible, and definitely not engage them in any long conversations. This is why people are nervous about opening their doors to strangers as well. Once the door is open, the whole house is potentially at risk. The fear of the unknown is quite powerful, and it's therefore quite common for one to seldom open the door to an unfamiliar face. Although this way of thinking seems logical, how can one know who is familiar unless the door is first opened?

One solution to solving this identity problem is to develop a system of bell reading techniques. Growing up, I always had my own set of keys, and I generally didn't need to use the bell. However, sometimes the keys would be misplaced, and it would be very annoying to wait outside for hours just because my brothers were scared of opening the door. The whole family need not be on red alert just because one member of the household left his keys in his yesterday’s pants pocket. Therefore, my older brother developed a kind of Morse Code for door bells. Naturally the code was slightly annoying, and this made it much more effective as well. This code was a secret for me and my brothers alone, and we were able to safely find our way inside without scaring everyone in the house to death.

Although this kind of private key cryptography works fine with relatives, it doesn't quite solve the problem for the average innocent folks that would have no knowledge of the code and would probably not have the gall to actually use it either way. Other methods must be used in order to screen the average door bell ringer. A more general solution would be to deduce the identity of unknown visitors through careful analysis of the door bell ring. The potential identity of the visitor can usually be narrowed down first. Ninety percent of non-coded bell rings come from collectors of one kind or another. The other nine percent come from the mail carrier, Con Edison, neighbors, or political activists. Only one percent of the time is the person a complete stranger. After narrowing down the possibilities, by carefully listening to the length of the bell it is possible to deduce some pertinent information. Collectors generally give very short rings especially if they are just a few kids selling raffle tickets. However, if one hears a very long ring it is quite probable that it's an old man collecting for his institution. Mail carriers and Con Edison always give the shortest rings. Neighbors always ring the bell somewhere in the middle, but it's always hard to tell exactly. Long and annoying repetitive rings most likely signal danger or an emergency. A short whisper of a ring followed by a longer ring is probably indicative of a shy individual that may have important things to give you or an important favor to ask of you. A careful reading of the door bell can sometimes both prevent unwanted confrontations and avoid wasted time. However, door bell reading alone is rarely reliable enough, and some other techniques are undoubtedly necessary.

Other techniques may be used in conjunction with bell reading. The time of day can give some clues as to the potential threats of answering the door. Earlier in the day it's very unlikely to encounter problems, and the stranger is probably just a FedEx delivery person. Late at night, however, potential risks increase exponentially. It is quite possible that there are a bunch of drunken college students panhandling for extra booze. More caution is advised at those times. Sometimes after reading enough into the bell, it’s possible to peek through the curtain in hopes of seeing who may be there. Although this technique can be very effective, it is also quite risky. Not only does it feel very awkward to be caught staring at someone, it also informs the stranger of your presence. Once he or she knows you are home, it will likely be much longer before the door bell finally stops ringing. Proper care must be taken to remain undetected. Although some of these techniques may help, the identity problem seems to present a formidable challenge.

With the invention of the intercom system, however, all the worries of outsiders seem to fade away. This device can enable one to communicate with the outdoors, and it solves the problem of dealing with disagreeable people. No longer does one have to listen carefully to the rhythm of the bell or sneak a peek from behind the window. Instead of personal interaction, a few brief questions can decide whether this guest is worthy of attention. An innocent person can prove his or her innocents, and the occasional scary stranger won't fool anyone. It seems that this device has become effective enough at dealing with the identity problem, and few people even realize that such a problem ever existed. Telemarketing has replaced most door to door panhandling, and breaking through windows has replaced the usual front door hold up. The intercom is a simple example of how technological progress can completely revolutionize the world.

An incident that happened to me a few days ago brought to life some other purposes for the intercom, and I began realizing what a great device it really was. Some people would like information about the occupants of the house before actually meeting them. Aside from helping screen outsiders to avoid unwanted encounters, an intercom helps screen insiders from helpless collectors as well. When I heard the bell ring a few nights ago I wasn't in the mood of using the intercom. Instead, I used my bell reading clairvoyance to discern that there was a collector at the door, and I felt confident dealing with him in person. I went straight for the door and opened it. The visitors were three very young girls going door to door selling raffles for their school. When they saw me come to the door two of them began running away. It was clear that my not using the intercom was a complete startle to them. The third girl standing at the bottom of the steps informed me very rapidly that she was selling raffle tickets for her school. I decided that she probably expected some old lady to answer the door, and I didn't feel obligated to buy any raffles. Although, I had correctly identified the strangers as collectors, a brief use of the intercom would have avoided traumatizing these girls for life.

I am amazed at how much some simple pieces of technology have shaped our lives. At first I was puzzled about the whole situation. But then I realized that it is abnormal to answer the door in a completely uninformed manner. It has become that natural to expect people to use the intercom, and people are already relying on it in order to screen those inside the house. I had never given the intercom much thought before this happened, but now I realized how important this device has become for everyone. Once certain devices enter our lives they can easily become practically indispensible.

Field Trip

2011-01-20T23:09:00.012-05:00

Can someone take a vacation if he or she doesn't work? I would say the answer is clearly no. If no work is being done, there is no job to be vacating from. It therefore would imply that a very valuable perk of holding full time employment is the ability to enjoy the little time-off that one manages to procure. The unemployed, however, don't even have a single minute of vacation. Even weekends are not vacation. Day in and day out, there is the constant job searching, life planning, soul searching, and basic contemplating. For such a person, a vacation can only come about through an exciting field trip. It also helps if the field trip is completely funded through the finances of a friend. Although the feeling of returning to the usual lack of work resembles that of a recently laid off employee, the ephemeral distraction from reality that an unexpected exploration can offer is a very pleasurable experience.

Today I broke from my usual rather dull routine, and I accompanied my brother and a friend of mine on a visit to the American Museum of Natural History in New York. I woke up early in the morning to learn with my friend like any other day, when he informed me of his plans for taking a trip to the museum. He had the week off for mid-winter vacation, and I had my usual job search and studying to do. When he asked me what my plans were for the day and whether I wanted to join him on an excursion, I couldn't think of any urgent tasks on my schedule. I decided to go with him, and I brought my brother along for the ride. Having ate my daily dose of liquorice and inserting fresh batteries into my camera, all three of us headed to the Manhattan bound subway. Although we did miss our stop due to being on an express train, the train ride was relatively uneventful, and before we could have any serious arguments, we had arrived at our destination.

Of course, living in the twenty first century, a trip is never worth going on if it isn't viewed through the lens of a digital camera. Fortunately I was armed with the memory and battery power to start the trip off on the right foot. Right when we arrived at our station I started shooting some pictures.

When we entered the museum we were greeted with the famous large dinosaur skeleton. As a child I was never really crazy about seeing dinosaurs, and although I had frequented these parts many times before, I never quite appreciated the vast collection of bones they had on display. But now I was a little older, and I had a broad knowledge of Calvin and Hobbes comics. This made me much more interested in seeing these enormous and vicious looking dead animals. Right after buying our tickets we proceeded straight to the fourth floor in search of the T. Rex. The skeleton of this creature was even bigger than I had expected, yet it wasn't too big to fit in my camera's lens or my camera's memory. Naturally, it wasn't too large to fit in the blog either.

Next we saw some Allosaurs, Woolly Mammoths, and some really big looking dinosaurs that had names which I couldn't recall from my comic book knowledge. We covered all the exhibits on the top floor, and thankfully all those enormous skeletons remained dead.

There were lots of interesting videos describing the mind numbing tasks required to find, clean, and preserve buried fossilized bones. It seems that unemployment is not a new phenomenon, and even years ago people would randomly dig for bones in desserts just to earn a few dollars. I asked one of the tour guides what the market value of the T. Rex would be. He told me that a slightly more complete skeleton of the same species was sold in Chicago for 8 million dollars. Having heard that, I now understood why certain people would spend their time doing what they did. I could forget the stock market or searching for gold. All that was necessary was to find a dinosaur's skeleton. For some reason this sounded a lot easier to me than finding a job in this economy. Unfortunately, it is probably a lot harder, and I couldn't even begin thinking of where I would start to look for such things. After all, I had never bumped into dinosaur bones while digging in my backyard.

After finishing the fourth floor it was time for lunch. We took the train to Bryant Park, and found a pizza store around there. Then we stopped to daven at the Chabad of Midtown Manhattan. Because today happened to be Tu Bishvat, there was plenty of new fruits available there for our consumption. We stuck around a little before heading back Uptown. Although, I had very little to do with this decision, we ended up walking the forty blocks back to the museum.

By the time we arrived back I was already very tired. Although my friend claimed to have been rejuvenated by the long walk, he eventually fell asleep sitting down in front of one of the videos about sea creatures. There were way more exhibits than the hours in the day could provide for. We were able to see some of the more important pieces, but before long we decided that we had to start heading home. As usual we saved my favorite exhibit for last, and I was very reluctant to leave the gems behind. We were all very tired, and we started to head home. Fortunately, I was able to snap a few more pictures to make our second visit to the museum worthwhile. Here are some of the highlights.

I had no idea that a Komodo Dragon was this big!

This famous Blue Whale is a must see.

How old do you think this tree was?

Yes this is a real meteorite from outer space.

I thought all the gems were cool but these peridots were something else.

These are some random cool minerals that I didn't have a chance to really see.

And if I'm not mistaken, this exhibit is real gold.

I obviously didn't have enough time to visit all the exhibits, and the gift shop was a place that I real should have had time for. I guess I will have to return for another vacation some day to see what we had missed, and to take some more pictures. Until then I guess I will have to go back to the good old job search. This has been an exciting field trip.

Panhandling

2011-01-17T22:03:00.005-05:00

Although many of my friends may disagree, I consider myself to be a very generous person by nature. If I had the resources available, I would find great satisfaction in giving away much of my wealth in order to better the lives of needy people. However, I don't presently have the capability of throwing away money, and I have begun to value purchasing power as a very important and cherished tool. Furthermore, having been cheated before by random strangers accosting me for generous donations, I have naturally become quite skeptical when dealing with what seem to be beggars. Therefore, I rarely part with my hard earned money when presented with an unsolicited opened hand, and I generally give charity only to confirmed legitimate organizations.

Yesterday, however, I found myself digging my hands into my pockets for a complete stranger in what has become very uncharacteristic of my nature. I was walking down a busy street in Brooklyn minding my own business when an alarmed person approached me and started on a rant. Although I always remain alert in these situations, I am never shy of helping people or at least listening to what they have to say. It seems that I haven't yet developed that New Yorker talent of completely ignoring unrequested company. I stopped to listen to what this person had to say. He was speaking very fast, and his method of panhandling seemed almost professional. "Can you please spare a quarter for me?" he asked. "I am stuck here and I need to make a phone call to someone who will be able to give me a ride." The words came out of his mouth really fast, and the sound of his voice was alarming enough that my first inclination was to put my hands in my pockets and supply him with his request. The guy sounded like he was really desperate. As I put my hand in my pocket to find some spare change, the panhandler started to test my limits. I guess I was dressed presentably with a nice cap, and he must have felt that I would give more than a quarter. He didn't stop talking. "Maybe you can give me $2.50 for the subway or maybe you have $10.00 for a car service, I just need to get home soon." At this point I was well aware that I was dealing with a professional. I thought for a few seconds, and then I promptly brought forth a quarter and wished him good luck. I figured that although this person was obviously lying, he had done such a nice job telling me this story, and I felt he earned his money with his astute behavior.

Stories such as this one cause me to think about the concept of charity. People approach me all the time asking for unearned gifts of money. I wonder what these people contribute in order to deserve this money any more than I do. I am looking for a job, and I earn money doing part-time work. These people simply open their hands and expect me to fork over some hard earned cash. Additionally, how do I know that these people really need the money? What if these guys go out and buy cigarettes and alcohol with the extra dollars that they manage to convince me to give away? Maybe these people are living lives of luxury while I live a life of sustenance. It doesn’t seem fair for one person to sweat for his bread and another person to be handed free food.

More thought on the subject, however, leads me to different conclusions. Although these people don't seem to be contributing to mankind, they are working for their money as well. At the place where I pray every morning there are always dozens of collectors seeking that daily quarter. One morning, a rather young collector was approached and asked why he didn't find a job. A young person should have ambitions, and there is no excuse for a perfectly capable individual to panhandle. The young man explained that he does indeed work many hours a day to support his family. However, he happens to work all day collecting money from generous people.

Panhandling has many of the qualities of the usual means of employment. Firstly, like any other job, making a lot of money requires some talent. Some people walk around with a helpless look and a sheepish appearance, and others march in with a confident smile and an aggressive approach. Some people shake cups of change and others flash wads of bills. Some people are easily dismissed, and others make me feel very guilty. People with more skills make more money. Secondly, like regular employment, the more effort one contributes the more fruits are produced. Some people approach with a story and explain their situation to everyone that they see. Others sit on the street corner and call for help to those that pass by. Still others just sit on the floor shaking a cup full of quarters, and others just bury their faces behind cardboard signs. As usual, those who try harder are more successful, and they definitely bring home more money. Finally, although not that obvious, panhandlers do provide some sort of satisfaction to those who contribute to their cause. It always feels good to know that another person was feeling pleasure from your donation. Even if the person doesn't necessarily need cigarettes or alcohol, it is not for other people to judge what someone should or shouldn't choose to spend money on. He or she may truly need these products, and it feels good to know that you provided for someone’s needs. Even if someone has completely lied about his or her circumstances, everyone can use a little more money, and if it is not used on a bus ride home it may be used on next month’s groceries. And even if the person may not do anything worthwhile with the money, it is sometimes very entertaining to hear the stories that these people come up with, and I feel that, like any other entertainer, some people earn their money just by demonstrating their talents.

I am reminded of another story that involved a very professional panhandler. A few years back I was going on my very first date in Manhattan, and I was approached by what looked like a Jewish man with broken front teeth. He began to tell me a long story about how he was touring the city and an anti-Semitic taxi driver drove off with his bags still in the car. Of course, his wallet happened to be strategically placed somewhere in the car as well, and now he was stranded all alone in the big city. He needed me to lend him thirty dollars in order for him to take a train ride to Philadelphia. He was ready to take down my address, and he would mail the money to me as soon as he arrived back home. I don't think my date believed him at all, but back in those days I was slightly more trusting. I didn't have enough money to help him out completely, but I did give him more than a quarter, and I had him take down an address in order to see if he would return any of it. There were many holes in his story, and naturally he would never end up returning any of the money (at least not yet). After finding out that my father had fallen prey to the exact same person, I began wondering what could be done to punish such people. It is quite possible that I would run into him a second time. What if I would call the police on this guy? Then it occurred to me that the police wouldn't do anything because this person didn't do anything wrong. He gave me exactly what I paid for. He was a shrewd and talented panhandler, and he had definitely earned his money. I, in return, received the satisfaction in knowing that I helped someone out. Even if his story was completely made up, I can be sure that he put the money to good use.

Morality

2011-01-15T23:39:00.001-05:00

What is morality? Are there any objective morals that every human being must follow? Is there a logical or scientific source for an unquestionably factual code of ethics? These are classic topics of debate and discussion, and the answer as usual seems to remain elusive to the thinking mind. Perhaps the most frequently asked question is whether or not someone can be moral without having any religious beliefs. As is the case with many debated topics, the definitions of each of the terms can play a fundamental role in the outcome of the argument. Although clearly defining morality is crucial, some simple definitions can lead to deceptively simplified and misleading results. It is very important to make sure that the definition doesn't distort the common notion of the word.

Let's first start by supplying a definition, and then see if it can fit the context of the common uses of the actual word. In order to answer questions of morality, let's start by defining morality simply as "the following of rules." A moral person is therefore one that follows rules, and morals are the rules that are followed. Conversely, an immoral person is one that does not follow any rules. The substitution of this word seems at first glance to fit pretty accurately into the widely accepted usage of the concept of morality. In the absence of any counter example it seems proper to stick with this definition and use this simplified form of the concept to tackle some of the more problematic issues involving its usage.

Now let's try to answer some of the questions that are commonly discussed regarding the nature of morality. First of all, what is morality? This question is answered through the definition: Morality is the following of rules. But this definition doesn't qualify the kind of rules, and therefore, the following of any rules must be categorized together with morality. There would therefore be no difference between someone who makes it his or her job to give car rides to other people and a person that goes out of his or her way to find a hitch every morning. Each person is equally moral because each is following self described rules. Let’s look at another question. Are there any objective morals that every human being must follow? In other words, do humans have to follow certain rules? Well technically humans have to perform certain life functions if they wish to stay alive. But nothing prevents people from doing what they want. Humans don't have any more rules than common insects. Now, is there a logical or scientific source for an unquestionably factual code of ethics? Well it is possible to say that the laws of nature give humans certain rules. But these rules can't be broken, and therefore, to follow these laws doesn't involve any voluntary action. Therefore, it seems that there are no scientific morals in the sense that humans have rules that they should intentionally place upon themselves. It can be said that normal humans should follow certain behavior patterns, but like any animal, there is nothing inherently wrong with deviating from the norms of the species. Finally, let’s analyze the most highly debated topic, and see what light this definition game can shed on the subject. Is it possible to have morality without religion? Although this question seemed difficult, the new definition makes it look like a joke. Of course it's possible to follow rules even if one is not religious. Just make rules and follow them. A person may do nothing more than decide to always buy gas from the same gas station and his actions have fallen into the category of moral practices.

After answering these questions, although not running into any logical fallacy, the definition seems to have strayed far from the common usage of the concept of morality. People think of a moral person as one that does what's right. Things like murder are considered immoral, and things like charity are considered moral. Morality seems to be more connected with certain universal principles of right and wrong. Furthermore, right and wrong seem to be intimately connected with a transcendental or mysterious purpose of existence. The concept of morality begins to sound very much like religion. The definition introduced doesn't seem to have anything to do with these commonly accepted morality topics.

Although a clear definition of morality may remain elusive, people seem to have an ability of sensing morality, and certain things are considered right and others are considered wrong. But there doesn't seem to be any logical justification for any of these practices, and scientific inquiry alone seems to leave us with few answers in these matters. It would therefore seem that morality is only achieved through religious beliefs.

Some scientists and philosophers have attempted to create logical rules and reasons behind certain morals. Based on these arguments, morality can be subject to scientific inquiry and certain actions can be deemed scientifically or logically wrong. The claim is that these rules are not connected with any purpose or religion, yet they are still binding on every individual. Morality can be claimed as a kind of social contract that is the best path for a human to take in order to derive the most pleasure from life. It can be argued that people should behave morally as a kind of insurance policy against adverse social interactions with other individuals. It can also be argued that morals are a promotion of the collective good or pleasure of human beings or any conscious being. Acting morally would be the right thing to do inasmuch as it causes more happiness in the world. However, these definitions of morality require their own postulates or world view, and most of them don't fit the common notion of morality either. The social contract approach has its problems. Naturally a weak person would want everyone to agree not to murder. But a powerful individual may not wish to take on the insurance that the social contract has to offer. Additionally, some people may not value life, and they may not care if they die. Regarding the common good of humanity, why should someone want to spread goodness? It may seem nice, but there is no logical reason for someone to give up pleasure in order to share it with others. Both of these approaches to morality have their own world views that are not necessarily inherently logical or shared by everyone.

Perhaps the most fundamental flaw in any of these definitions of morality is the lack of the status symbol attributed to the moral individual. A moral person doesn't just follow certain rules in the same way that people chose different flavors of ice cream. A moral person should be given a higher status than an immoral one. A certain level of holiness or awe should be attributed to one that does good things for goods sake. But this concept is quite foreign to the logical mind as well. Although certain actions may be optimal or smart, nothing can make one person truly better than another person. Both will remain human no matter what they decide to do or what they happen to accomplish. With the above definitions of morality, neither a murderer nor a philanthropist can be considered a better person. Does a person fall to a sub-human status if he or she refuses to buy health insurance? Why should someone fall to a lower status just because he or she does not wish to engage in a social contract? Additionally, why should someone achieve a higher status just because he decides not to murder for the selfish reason of not wanting to be hurt by others? Although admittedly completely illogical, a moral person must somehow surpass an immoral person in what must be a spiritual or religious plain. This is the only way to give the common notion of morality the proper definition that it deserves.

It seems quite clear that the commonly accepted notion of morality is intimately connected with one's religion or world view. The common experience of morals escapes the realm of logical reasoning or scientific enquiry. Although it is possible to give definitions to suit one's arguments, these definitions may not necessarily be satisfactory in their description of common experience.

My Thoughts of Trains

2011-01-11T12:28:00.000-05:00

Over the past week I have had a lot of time to ride the subway. Along with the long and tiring commutes came some very interesting trains of thought. There is no limit to the amount of interesting experiences that are possibly encountered while riding MTA subways, and I feel I have already had my fair share of those. However, just being forced to sit on a train full of random people for more than an hour can create a wellspring of very interesting thoughts even without any overly interesting incidents. I have therefore decided to relate some of my interesting subway thoughts along with an intuitive rule of the rails.

While on a long train ride to a fairly unpleasant destination, my mind frequently plays with a few distinct recurring thoughts. When I first set foot on the train I generally think of just relaxing throughout the long ride while placing any thoughts of the destination outside of my conscious mind. Eventually, I am inevitably gripped with an irrational desire to explore and go free. As I pass through various unexplored stations I find myself with an uncontrollable urge to exit the train and abort the mission. I figure it will be extremely entertaining to just walk out at a random station and just roam the streets of an uncharted territory. Station after station, I sit in my seat longing for that adventure that doesn't really exist. After all, I have explored most of Brooklyn, and I am not really missing out on any exciting sites. The only actually mysterious site is the train stations themselves. Also, my lack of interest in my real destination gives me the desire of just acting in a haphazard manner. Fortunately, I rarely fall for these temptations, and more often than not I just fall asleep to the soporific rocking of the train.

When I awake from my unintended nap, I generally notice that the train is far closer to my destination than expected (I rarely miss my stop). Having forgot about all the previous encounters with foreign stations, my mind becomes filled with another familiar train of thought. I start longing to stay on the train. The train continues to the next station after it drops me off. And after that station, there is yet another station. I want to remain on the train and see how far the train can go. I am aware of the length of the line as depicted in the train map, but seeing is believing. Besides, who wants to leave the train? It feels like leaving a baseball game after only the fifth inning. I will only reluctantly leave the train knowing that I will probably never visit those remaining stops. I typically remain sitting in my seat until the train is about to close its doors in order to savor every last minute of the commute.

On some special commutes, the long train ride gives me opportunity to develop new laws of commuting. During one of my most recent train rides I encountered a fairly common problem that gave some support to an already well established rule of the rails. As the train opened its doors, I began entering what I thought was a completely empty car. Only after a quick inspection of the far end corner seat did I notice a vagrant individual that seemed to be fast asleep. Almost immediately following the sight was the smell. The entire car reeked of an unknown odor. I couldn't see myself staying in that car another moment. Without a second thought I made a dash for the next car, and was able to enter safely with my olfactory equipment still intact. I knew from that point on that my commute wouldn’t be one of the boring sleepy kinds.

As the train pulled out of the station my mind became flooded with thoughts regarding my recent experience. First I thought of how wasteful it is for these people to claim an entire car to themselves. But then I realized that there were probably no people taking the next train on account of his presence, and the same amount of people would occupy the train either way. Then I started to wonder how it must feel to have a whole personal train car. Was he insulted or was he proud to be left alone? What laws can be written to prevent people from doing what he was doing? Was he even doing anything wrong? What could be done to help such people? How did everyone in the car feel back when this guy originally entered the train? The questions continued faster than I could find answers, and I was already quite entertained.

The entertainment didn't stop with my entering the adjacent car. Apparently, every normal human being agreed with my assessment of the situation, and with every stop of the train my car saw an inflow of smelly car refugees. Some people would enter the odorous car and immediately run out and head to my car. Others were not as fast. These people would wait in the car until a critical level of odor registered in their neurons. At that point these people would form a line and walk through the door connecting the two cars. I was sitting at the other side watching the faces of each victim. Each new person would enter the car as if he or she had a story to tell everyone. In reality, they were only providing entertainment for people who had already experienced the encounter with the stench. I was in no position to think anymore. I just watched people making different decisions with equally different facial expressions. I watched as a few people even braved the fumes and decided to stay in the smelly car. I could feel their pain as they sat in the spatial car wondering why they chose to endure such a treatment. Many people run from painful situations, but some people are just not able to give up. However, sooner or later everyone left that car and came into my car with an entertaining grimace.

This story lends credence to one of the most fundamental rules of the rails: One should never enter an empty train car. There are times late at night when average pleasant smelling individuals have the privilege of having a full car to themselves. However, such situations are extremely rare during normal commuting hours. If something seems too good to be true, it probably isn't true. When an empty train car greets you at the station, pass it up if you wish to avoid any unpleasant circumstances. If a car is empty you should always be suspicious of something. During this ride it happened to be a homeless individual. But, there are a number of possible deplorable circumstances as well. One of the times when I entered an empty car I was greeted by a pigeon. At least the bird didn't smell. But it was trying to fly away, and that can be quite distracting to someone who routinely takes naps during a daily commute. If you enter a crowded car, you are not necessarily guaranteed a seat. But you are also less likely to encounter very unpleasant situations.

Taking a daily subway commute leads to a plethora of train ideas. I have random thoughts during normal commutes, and even crazier thoughts during those eventful ones. Just the other day I was wondering how many people would fall off the train if the conductor mistakenly opened the wrong doors. Now I am wondering how that homeless man would have felt if he found himself in the same car as the pigeon. Add to that two people with guitars and you have some seriously bizarre situations. With all of the joy of taking the trains I wonder why anyone would commute in any other way. I can't speak for other people, but I enjoy the thought of trains.

Minesweeper - Windows Vista/Windows 7

2010-12-30T17:55:00.000-05:00

Minesweeper is without a question my most favorite computer game. Back when I was a young child and most computers used the Windows 3.1 operating system, Solitaire and Minesweeper were the only two computer games that came pre-installed with the operating system. Since Solitaire offered zero mental stimulation, and I had no real use for computers either way, I used to spend most of my computing time with Minesweeper. Although I started by aimlessly pressing the buttons, I eventually learned the rules, and after some practice began winning games. Eventually I became quite good at it, and I would easily sweep the expert level.

As I became an expert mine sweeper, I began loving the game. It was time to search the Internet for websites that would support my hobby. After clearing the expert level mine field in about 120 seconds, I felt I was probably the Minesweeper world champion. Who else would waste enough time with a silly game to come even remotely close to my timing? However, a small online search was all I needed to discover my error. Many people had beaten the game in less than half my time. Additionally, I found entire websites dedicated to the game, and I learned there were some basic tricks of which I was completely unaware. The website by the name of Authoritative Minesweeper even has a section of World Ranking players. Players on this list were capable of sweeping all the mines in each level with a combine timing of less than 100 seconds. I realized that I was nowhere near the best at the game. I also realized that many other people had much more free time on their hands than I did. My newly found minesweeper company was a source of encouragement, and I continued to improve at the game. I incorporated all the tricks into my playing techniques, and I eventually achieved a World Ranking score. Beginner was swept in 2 seconds, Intermediate was swept in 23 seconds, and Expert was swept in 67 seconds. With those scores I would be considered ranked the 700th best mine sweeper in the entire world! With a ranking like that, who wouldn't love the game?

Recently, however, I have been introduced to a new kind of Minesweeper. Our family computer has been showing the blue screen of death way too many times, and my father decided it was time to buy a new one. The new computer uses Windows 7, and it comes with many more games than previous versions of Windows. Among them is a new and updated version of Minesweeper. This new version offers many new features. Unfortunately, I am very displeased with a majority of the upgrades, and I am quite certain that I am not alone in these opinions. The programmers at Microsoft seem to have little knowledge of public opinion for this game, and some grave mistakes were made with their latest product.

This is the current version of Minesweeper for Windows Vista and Windows 7:

Without any serious inspection, some glaring problems are readily apparent here. The iconic symbol of Minesweeper has been removed from the display. Of course I am referring to the smiley button that used to occupy the top center of the gaming board. This character was quite literally the face of Minesweeper. Aside from completely ruining the appearance of the game, it's now impossible to restart the game by simply clicking on the icon. This brings me to some other problems with the game. Every time one wins or loses, a dialog box asks whether one wishes to play again or cancel. Any experienced mine sweeper knows that this can lead to hours of aggregated "wasted time." Additionally, some extra animations have been added that distract serious players.

I have found many more problems with the new Minesweeper version. The "best time" feature has been modified in an adverse manner. One can no longer submit their names with their best time. I assume this feature was eliminated because many more people have their own personal computers now than when the game was originally programmed. However, I still like to see my name next to my astounding records. Another interesting tweak was the changing of the name of Expert to Advanced. This change is very minor, but it's still a little irritating to those who are big fans of the game. The next change that disturbed me slightly was enacted as a result of some Minesweeper critics. Apparently some people felt the idea of sweeping a mine field as an entertaining game was a little offensive. These people felt that flowers should be used instead. Thankfully, Microsoft has not allowed for a complete destruction of the mine setup, but they have added a compromising feature to the latest version. Those who wish may play flower garden, and navigate through flowers instead of those horrible mines. Personally, this version makes me feel like I winner even when I lose. Instead of seeing a field of mines explode, one sees a field of flowers in bloom. This is not a proper feature for such an intelligent and dynamic game. Finally, perhaps the worst problem with the current version is the restart feature. Being able to restart a game based solely on the hiding of mines seems to be completely absurd. After one sees all the mines, it's quite easy to print the screen, redo the same game, and win in half the time. There is no more credibility in any of the best times. Similar to all the various cheats in the Space Cadet pinball game for Windows, Minesweeper has turned into a big joke. This is very problematic for us serious players. Below I have demonstrated how I can now win a custom board with 67 mines in a 9 by 9 tile grid.

You may also notice the beautiful flowers in this most serious mine sweeping adventure. Such a feat would have been completely impossible without the current methods of cheating.

To be fair, I have to admit that there are some positive features in the new Minesweeper as well. I have to admit that I love seeing a green minesweeper board. Green is my favorite color, and it's great to see my favorite color synthesized with my favorite game. Additionally, the little question mark that appears after one removes a flag is no longer part of the default settings. Professionals have known for years that there was no use for this feature, and it's great to see that the programmers finally agree. Another cool feature with the best time function is the dating of each best time achievement. This is definitely a plus because I love to document great moments in history. Finally, although some of the animations may be annoying, they are easily turned off and on with the click of a mouse. I may be a serious mine sweeper, but there are times when I may find it fun to turn on the animations just to fool around a little.

Minesweeper will never be the same in the Windows Vista/Windows 7 version. I have some major issues with the new form of my favorite game, and I guess I will just have to live with it. This isn't the worst thing in the world, and it should be the biggest of my problems in life. Hopefully I will seamlessly adapt to my new environment, and I will continue to break records during spells of boredom. I have already documented some of my latest winnings in the new version. Here are some of the results:

I hope everyone out there continues to enjoy this wonderful game.

Are you also trapped in your house?

2010-12-27T10:11:00.000-05:00

As you may have heard, the north-east coast of the United States has just been hit with a tremendous snow storm. Snow has been hitting all parts of the country since October, and alas New York City has no longer been spared. Although the snow had already been falling yesterday, the strong winds didn't really start until later last night. Anyone who bothered to have a head start on the clean up would have found that any shoveling done at night was completely useless. The wind drifts have a way of distributing the snow in a most unfair manner. As usual, our side of the street was literally covered in 4-5 feet of snow, and the other side of the street was completely clean (now I know why the original owner sold us our house in the spring).

I woke up a little later this morning knowing that there was no way to make the mile and a half commute to my regular shul. I decided to daven at 8:00 AM in the shul around the corner from my house. I was ready to leave at twenty to eight, but I was in for a surprise. The front door simply would not open. After pushing a little with no results, I used the side door instead. I would later realize why the front door would not open.

After making it out the side, I was able to find my way to the street. I noticed some interesting sites during my morning stroll. First of all, it seems like some people still think they can use their cars in these conditions.

This guy's car was parked in middle of the street, and buried in a foot of snow. I was smart enough not to try to pull my car into action.

Can you see where my car is hiding?

Then I witnessed the evils of the wind. If we were all hit uniformly I would have less to complain about. But the snow is always less white on the other side.

This is our side.

This is the other side.

Then I experienced even more evils of the wind. To make my walk more eventful, a big gust blew my hat off my head, and my yarmulke flew under one of the cars. All that care taken to avoid the deep piles was now for naught. I chased after my hat, and found myself waste deep in icy snow. I caught the hat, but couldn't find the yarmulke. There was no time to look for it, or to find my way back into my house. I just put on my hat and continued to walk a little more cautiously.

Obviously, once I made it to the other side my walk was one of negligible distances. I was able to make it there and back in one piece, and I saw my father already trying to form a pathway from the side door (we were not brave enough to try the front door). I jumped into action right away, and started shoveling a path into the street. After that was done I started working on the sidewalk. I had made some progress but my energy was completely sapped. The large naturally formed igloo (with no door) sitting in front of my driveway was just too much for me to move at this time. I started contemplating the idea of burrowing a tunnel through the large snow pile, but I didn't think anyone would be brave enough to traverse a structure of that nature. I had had enough, and I went inside to rest up.

Here is some of my work for the day.

When I came inside to rest, my beard was incased in ice. This was an unusual problem that I had never had before. Fortunately, I had nowhere to go anyway, and I just relaxed in the warmth of my house while my face melted.

This is perfect weather for the unemployed. Nobody seems to be going to work either way, and the trains are all out of service. I guess I am just trapped in my house waiting for the snow to melt. I haven't seen this much snow in front of my house since the blizzard in 1996. This is only the beginning of the winter as well. We seem to be entering some sort of miniature ice age. I think I should head south for the rest of the winter.

Law of Negligible Distances

2010-12-26T18:05:00.000-05:00

The weather outside has been quite cold lately, but my body has already adjusted to winter temperatures. My added level of cold resistance gives me the courage to commute long distances on a bicycle in frigid sub-twenty weather. Naturally I must bundle up in a heavy coat and a cotton cap before attempting my mile and a half morning ride. Any long ride in this kind of weather can be incredibly painful especially if one's hands and ears are exposed to the wind. However, for very short commutes, I frequently brave the winter air with nothing more than a flimsy jacket. Even in the dead of winter, one might notice me not wearing a coat while taking a one or two block walk. To explain why I think it may sometimes be perfectly normal to walk in sub-zero weather without proper winter attire, I have developed the law of negligible distances.

The law of negligible distances stems from the common assumption that pain is a function of time. Anyone can endure one tenth of a second of the most excruciating pain. However, even a light headache can become a real annoyance after being subjected to its inflictions for more than a few hours. Parents who love their young children will gladly bring them to the doctor for their necessary vaccines, but they would be deeply disturbed if one of them would have a light fever for more than one day. It is clear that pain is directly correlated with the quantity of time subjected to discomforts. Similarly, the level of cold chills is directly correlated with the amount of time spent in cold conditions. During a long bicycle ride, the cold is overbearing, and proper insulation is necessary to mitigate the painful experience. However, if one is merely taking an ice cream from the freezer, a large overcoat would seem a little superfluous. It makes logical sense, therefore, that the amount of clothing necessary for a walk in the cold should vary directly with the travel distance. The law of negligible distances states that walking a few blocks in the cold should not require a coat. The body can retain enough heat to allow for a comfortable 2-3 block walk, and the pain felt during those last few feet is negligible enough given the small amount of time.

Once my behaviors conform with accepted laws, I need less time explaining to people why I act the way I do. My parents always ask me to put on a coat if our thermometer reads anywhere below 40 degrees Fahrenheit. But sometimes wearing a coat is plainly inconvenient, and the short walk can easily be done without the extra layers. Instead of looking like a fool, and trying to explain why I don't think it is cold enough to require such provisions, I simply explain that I am following the law of negligible distances. My parents always listen to logical reasoning, and such a law is not easily refuted. Similarly, earlier this morning I was leaving my house for a short walk when my next door neighbor was leaving his house as well. He noticed that I wasn't wearing a coat, and he himself had been dressed very appropriately for winter weather. He thought it was a little weird that I was not even wearing a coat when he was all bundled up. I explained to him that it was not very weird at all. It was perfectly consistent with the law of negligible distances. He was about to walk about nine blocks and I was heading around the corner. Having clarified my behavior in a very concise and logical manner, he accepted my point, and we both went on our merry ways.

Some of us wear a coat religiously whenever the temperature drops below 40 degrees. Such a practice is commendable, and well within the norm of socially accepted behavior. However, those of us who feel that it's not completely necessary to sport a ski mask while taking out the garbage can find comfort in the law of negligible distances. One practice should not be considered any crazier than the other. Both are fairly reasonable and logical practices, and the choice should be based on the preferences of each individual. Although we may disagree on which distances are negligible, we agree that negligible distances do exist.

Liquorice Update

2010-12-26T15:32:00.000-05:00

These guys really grow fast. Here are some updated photos of our liquorice plants. There are ten of them in total as of now. One of them is already over an inch tall.

Liquorice!

2010-12-22T12:09:00.000-05:00

Are you one of those guys who still enjoys eating that red candy liquorice? I must admit that I too was very fond of the sweet and sugary flavor of the juicy red sweets. However, since then I have grown out of childish liquorice and I have developed a taste for the more mature version. This liquorice is the real deal.

This original black liquorice with all natural flavors tastes much better than the good old childhood candy. Also, real liquorice can help relieve a sore throat. Once you develop a taste for this stuff it will be very hard for you to even call the other version by the same name. After all, if it tastes like strawberry, why should it be called liquorice? This stuff has natural liquorice flavor, and the other stuff is just candy. You can't find something more real than this!

Actually, I may have exaggerated. I now have something a lot more real than even the black liquorice shown above. My father and I liked the real liquorice so much that we decided to have the real "real" thing. My father bought some liquorice seeds on the Internet, and now we have real liquorice growing on our kitchen window sill!

Here are some of the results thus far.

As you can see, some of the seeds have started to take root, and it looks like some green may be shooting out of the top. Once these plants grow to a large enough size, we may try to plant them in the backyard to see how they grow. Imagine a backyard full of liquorice plants. I wonder if it will smell as good as the candy.

Law By Common Sense

2010-12-20T11:29:00.000-05:00

Buckle up motorists - It's the law! And of course, as everyone knows, the law is the law! You follow the law or suffer the consequences. But why is that the case? What gives lawmakers the power to restrict the freedoms of other people? They are human beings just like the rest of us. People should be entitled to do whatever it is they see fit without worrying about the opinions of some law-giving authority.

A perfect system of laws would enable people to do exactly what they feel is appropriate. No individual is logical enough to create perfect laws that would equally apply to all of humankind. In fact, it seems like laws evade logic altogether, and most laws are nothing more than relative social constructs. Therefore, the ideal system would provide laws dictated through a consensus of the general population. When people vote to create laws, they are testifying to the moral superiority of those measures. By the fact that people have agreed to this law, it is apparent that this code of conduct is acceptable to that society, and the people of each locale are therefore free to act exactly how they see fit.

Unfortunately, it is not easy to implement this ideal society, and the kinds of democracy that abound today are only poor approximations of this model. Although people occasionally vote on referendums, and all representative lawmakers have earned their respective positions through popular polls, it is hard to claim that all the laws with all the esoteric language are a fair representation of the popular sentiment. Laws are very complicated, and loopholes are plentiful. Sophisticated politicians use convoluted logical arguments to concoct laws laced with legislative jargon. Very few people know the laws, and even fewer people understand the laws. Lawmakers compose, Judges interpret, and lawyers defend. If the law is far out of the reach of the common individual, it is definitely not the fair rules of conduct acceptable in that locale. Situations like these lead to the abrogation of freedoms.

If laws become too complicated, they cannot be easily justified. A good example of the shortfalls of a complicated structure of laws is the aftermath of the Wikileaks incident. Should we prosecute the founder of Wikileaks website for his misconducts? Lawmakers are not yet certain if he has violated any laws while engaging is his latest whistle blowing actions. But senators are looking far and wide hoping that at least some minor violations would eventually show up. Now ask yourself, if the investigations discover that laws were broken, would it be appropriate to take punitive actions? After all, if senators did not know the law, is it appropriate to hold him accountable for the law? Also, think of what happens if the investigation yields nothing. We may have an individual being vilified by all of humanity yet free of any legal charges. Why should the words in some law book take precedent over national sentiment? It is clear that complicated laws introduced in the current structure of government do not necessarily always represent the popular opinion of right and wrong.

A better form of law would be one that links punitive measures directly to popular opinion. Instead of governing by sophisticated scholarship, people follow common sense. The jury system in the United States represents a good start in the process of reaching this general framework of governing. With a jury, the final decision of guilt results from the popular decision of a few common citizens. It shouldn't matter what the smart judge or the shrewd lawyers have to say. If the people think a man is guilty, he is guilty by definition. The jury system is a good start, but a perfect system would have to augment this basic structure. There should be no laws and no law books. If a person acts in what seems to be an inappropriate manner, a jury would decide whether such actions are indeed unruly. Instead of 6 or 12 people, this jury would have about 30 people. If the jury feels that the person acted inappropriately, then the person has acted outside of the accepted codes of conduct in that locale. After much deliberation, the jury would decide the proper consequences as well. However, if these people find that the defendant has done nothing wrong, he or she has acted in a lawful manner.

With such a system in place, people would be free to do what they themselves have deemed appropriate. People need only act with common sense, and they wouldn’t have to worry about unknowingly violating esoteric laws. A law that does nothing more than to encourage people to act with common sense can be justified as a law that should bind all of us. We are not limiting anyone’s freedoms. Rather, we are collectively doing what we want.

Adaptive Commuting Theory

2010-12-16T09:25:00.000-05:00

Being the kind of guy who welcomes phone calls and never takes steps to bring a conversation to a close, I typically have phone conversations lasting until the early morning hours. This tendency can cause problems for someone who wakes up at 5:40 AM in order to attend daily morning prayers services located a mile and a half away. Going to bed late inevitably leads to a late rise, and an already stressful morning is compounded with additional time constraints. After sloppily tending to all the necessary morning chores, I am left with only one venue for mitigating the unbearable time pressure: The commute.

The time needed for commuting is frequently underestimated, especially when dealing with relatively short distances. If an appointment is scheduled for 10:00, and I leave my house at 9:45, it doesn't usually bother me that the normal travel time for that distance is twenty five minutes. To the contrary, if I happen to be running late, I typically plan to gain back lost time by commuting a little faster. When commuting by bicycle, there is always extra energy stored somewhere in my legs specially made available for these circumstances. When commuting by automobile, I push the gas peddle just a little closer to the floor. Even when commuting by train, I can play some neat tricks by transferring to express trains and then returning to local trains. The later I am, the faster I commute. The extra adrenaline rush helps me perform maneuvers that would have been unthinkable during a normal ride. I can sleep comfortably at night knowing that my adaptive commuting theory can take care of any delay that may arise from my tardy awakening.

Unfortunately, my beautiful theory of everything is lacking in one minor detail: There are other people on the road and there are other people in the trains. These people are going about there daily routine, and the fact that I am in a mad rush doesn't seem to cross their minds. While I slam the door, gun the engine and floor the gas peddle, a different and completely random human being is going about his daily drive in his good old humdrum manner. Although my world may be rushing, planet Earth isn’t rotating any faster. People of all kinds are capable of throwing a monkey wrench into adaptive commuting theory. School buses, garbage trucks, ambulances, fire trucks, pedestrians, cyclists, people looking for parking spots, people taking my potential parking spots, people double parking, people triple parking, people becoming sick on trains and people casually driving for fun, are all potential shocks to this otherwise perfect equilibrium. Although at least some of these threats should be anticipated, they are frequently overlooked.

These disturbances add elements of uncertainty to adaptive commuting theory. Can the commute really be relied upon to make back lost time? Some days I wake up late, yet everything works according to theory. On other days, I find myself stuck behind a garbage truck while circling for parking. This morning I was able to experience the clear contrast between both of these options during my daily commute.

I had been chatting with my brother until 1:00 AM, and the conversation only came to a close after his phone's battery went dead. With a working alarm clock and a theory of commuting, I fell into a peaceful slumber. At 5:40 AM an annoying alarm began slowly invading my dreams. I hit the snooze button three times and turned on the radio while only 10% awake. When I finally realized that all the vicious murder and robberies were not coming from my imagination but from 1010 WINS, it was already 6:20. I was running late! I had to reach my destination by 6:40! I hurried as fast as I could, and I was in the car and ready to go by 6:33.

I knew that I could make it on time if everything went according to theory. I backed up my one-way street to avoid a strategically placed traffic light. Approaching the first intersection, a delivery truck passed me by and stopped at the light. I was in no mood of following that slow moving vehicle, but there appeared to be no other option. The clock ticked to 6:36. Four minutes was more than enough with no lights and no trucks. After following the truck a few blocks, I noticed a red light ahead. It was at this point that I devised a plan to beat the traffic. I turned on a side street hoping to use a different avenue. As I raced down the block at about 40 mph, I noticed a car with New Jersey plates just thoughtlessly moving out of a parking spot. This time I floored the brakes, and was about to hit the horn. Didn't this guy realize that I was in a hurry? I held myself back from honking him, and I watched as he slowly and aimlessly glided through the yellow light, leaving me in the red. I didn't believe what had happened. I missed a crucial light because someone from a different state couldn't realize that my schedule was at stake. After waiting at two lights it was already 6:40. To make matters worse, I saw the same truck pass me by as I was waiting at the light. It turns out that my trick had made me even more late. It seemed like the commute would not be as adaptable as anticipated.

My plan failed and I was already late, but I wanted to be less late than more late. At this point I was ready to fly. The light turned green and I hit the gas. Light after light, I continued at a cruising speed of at least 45 mph. There were no cars! My plan was now working. I turned on a side street, found parking instantly, and arrived at my destination. It was only 6:43, and I managed to make up the lost time. The extra will power propelled by my desire for being slightly less late managed to shorten the commuting time substantially. The commuting theory had been partially vindicated.

I found partial evidence for adaptive commuting theory, but it still seems like giving one's self plenty of extra time for the commute is definitely the ideal. I have found that commutes can be completely unpredictable, and adaptive solutions can have equally unpredictable consequences. I still remember the time when I kept missing the train because I was switching back and forth between different platforms. I waited at one platform, watched one train after another arrive at the other platform, and finally switched platforms right before my train would arrive. Fortunately, my destination was only the Bronx Zoo. Commuting time should never be underestimated, and negative shocks frequently offset any gains produced through fanciful tricks. However, for the days that I happen to wake up late, I find comfort in fooling myself into thinking that the commute is relatively flexible.

Overanalyzing Stupid Questions

2010-12-14T17:34:00.000-05:00

Some people are blessed with the ability to laugh at dumb jokes. Other people are slightly less fortunate, and plain corny jokes produce nothing more than a cold stare. People that laugh at dumb jokes are easily entertained and generally affable, while those who can't find humor in cute puns are hard to impress and difficult to befriend. I happen to not fit either of these categories. When I hear a corny joke I am genuinely entertained, and I typically give plenty of laughs. However, if I see any illogical points associated with the humorous tidbits I make sure its author is aware of them. First comes the laugh, and then comes the critique. People find themselves in a puzzling situation. Should they tell me their jokes or should they not? Most people appreciate my laughing, but few appreciate the follow up commentary. Although I believe I have been gifted with an appreciation for stupid jokes, my over-analysis needs to be dealt with.

A good example of my over-analysis of jokes took place a few weeks ago during a train ride. While on the train I was overhearing a few loud girls talking about random things. My ears perked up when I heard one of them ask a theoretical question that sounded like it would introduce a pun. "What would you do if you were stuck in a car and you had a baseball bat?" the girl asked. Before I could hold myself back, the over-analysis power was already in full force. I realized that since the obvious answer was to smash the windows with the baseball bat, it was obviously not the correct answer. Then I thought of a stupid but slightly amusing answer. Could it be that the answer is just to unlock the door? I thought this could not be the answer because it would violate the premise of the question. If you are really stuck, you can't just unlock the door. The other girls said that they would smash the windows open. Then the girl replied: "Why would you smash the windows? Just unlock the door!" At that point I realized that I had overanalyzed the joke. I also realized that a better solution would have been to put the keys in the ignition and drive off. If stuck doesn't really mean stuck, anything can be the answer.

A few days later I was going out for pizza with a friend of mine when the same question came back to haunt me. This friend of mine was trying to test my personality to see how I would react in dire circumstances. He came up with a brilliant question. Unfortunately, I had not learned my lesson regarding my over-analysis of theoretical questions. "Chaim," he asked. "What would you do if you were trapped in a room and you had no way of getting out?" Without even giving the question much thought I already had the answer. I had overanalyzed this question days earlier. I told him I would do absolutely nothing. Before I could explain my deep analysis I was enduring a series of insults belittling my foolishness and laziness. I knew it was too late to save myself, but I figured I would give it a try. "What would you do?" I asked. He answered in a very passionate manner. "I would yell and scream, I would start praying really fervently, and I would bang hard on the door." Then I asked him why he would bother doing those things if it was impossible to escape. He brushed away my point, and told me not to overanalyze stupid questions.

I have learned that acting illogically is very important in certain circumstances. When being told corny jokes it's always nice to just give a little laugh and ignore any logical flaws. After hearing an inspiring story, common courtesy tells me that I should at least pretend to be emotionally moved. It shouldn't matter if the story sounds like a commonplace occurrence. Overanalyzing may lead to logical conclusions, but logical conclusions are not always the end all.

Religious Umbrella Users

2010-12-12T19:23:00.000-05:00

As a former religious umbrella user I feel I am qualified to tell over my experiences with umbrella abuse, and I think my story will be inspirational to all of those who find themselves in similar circumstances. Breaking any habit is never easy, and I hope people will learn from my story, and not falter the same way I have.

As a religious umbrella user I used an umbrella whenever it rained. Although, this practice may sound quite innocent at first, a further description would reveal the dangers of such practices. I would wake up on rainy mornings hearing the buckets of water splashing against the awning of my side door. With my umbrella in hand, I would embrace the wild weather with dauntless strides. Never did I lose faith in my umbrella, even in the toughest of monsoons. Over the years I began relying more and more on my umbrella to keep me dry. Many a day I would leave my house with no rain coat; just my good old umbrella at my side. Unbeknown to myself, I had become a confirmed religious umbrella user. What started as a harmless fad was now a real addiction. Although only three of its eight original ribs still worked, and the cloth had a big hole running right through the middle, I never doubted my umbrella for a second. I had perfect faith that this device was all that was needed to keep me completely dry.

A few weeks back my faith was seriously challenged, and ever since that incident my passion for umbrellas just hasn't been the same. Like any other rainy morning, I braved the streets with my trusted friend. I laughed at people with raincoats, and I mocked those who would stay indoors. Suddenly, I noticed something very peculiar. Although I was using an umbrella, I still seemed to be soaking wet. The wind blew the rain at me from all angles, and the mere two feet of plastic above my head was doing nothing for my pants. Doubts over the effectiveness of umbrellas began entering my thought patterns. I willed such blasphemes out of my conscious mind, and I continued to hold onto the umbrella with unbreakable faith. However, the biggest challenge had yet to come. Suddenly, a big gust of wind turned my umbrella inside out, and an enormous amount of drenching power was unleashed on my various articles of clothing. I wasn't taken yet. Being the warrior that I was I battled the rain head on. I skillfully positioned the umbrella causing the wind to work in my favor. The umbrella was back, and the battle continued. Gusts of wind came from every direction, but I kept repositioning my raingear. I remember onlookers watching me from the comforts of their automobiles. I was in a raging battle in what resembled a sword fight with nature. I put up a resilient fight, but the wind was just too powerful for me to endure.

After a good five minute duel, my energy was sapped, and I surrendered to the storm. I closed the broken umbrella and put down my hands. The cold rain smacked against my cheeks as I solemnly treaded back to my house. Like a sponge, my clothing soaked in all the rain, and I no longer resisted the forceful winds. Once defeated, I knew that my faith in umbrellas had come to an end. I would no longer trust them to keep me dry. After arriving back home, I changed into some dry clothing, put on a good waterproof raincoat, and promptly drove the car to my destination.

I wonder how many people put their faith in umbrellas. How many people use umbrellas even though they don't work? Many people think as I did; if you are using an umbrella you will be just fine. I have found to my dismay that umbrellas don't seem to do their job. I have left the group of religious umbrella users, and I now find it amusing to watch people battle the wind as I used to do. Aside from not working (a minor issue), umbrellas are constantly misplaced, and the broken ones are usually the only ones available during a time of need. Although I admit to still using umbrellas on occasion, I feel I am better off now that I am well aware of their limitations. I think umbrellas should come with a disclaimer warning the user about their potential misuses, and I wouldn't mind if each one came with a copy of a story such as mine for the purchaser’s perusal. I know it is hard for some people to break the habit and give up the umbrella. But I think after reading my inspirational story, people will think twice before relying on a flimsy piece of plastic to protect one’s self from buckets of water.

Last Night Of Chanukah 2010

2010-12-08T23:51:00.000-05:00

Does anyone else take pictures of their menorah? There is a lot of momentum building up with each successive night. First we start off lighting one wick. Then we light two and then we light three. Before you know it, we are lighting eight wicks, and the menorah is completely full. At this last night there is a lot of excitement in the air (not to mention all the smoke). I find it hard to just let all that excitement go to waste. In order to keep the momentum going, I have to document every step of the final life of each flame. I carefully film the last light as it gasps for oil. Once I have taken the pictures and the videos I can rest assured that I have fully experienced those last moments of the Chanukah menorah.

Good = Pleasure

2010-12-03T00:14:00.000-05:00

Defining the most basic concepts can be quite difficult. The foundations of all knowledge are based on postulates that can neither be proved nor disproved. Starting with self-evident statements, a solid framework is created, and useful conclusions can be universally accepted. When delving into philosophical thought, it is especially important to agree on definitions, and thereby avoiding countless amounts of arguments that would otherwise result. After a long debate over which circumstances are considered "good" for each person, it became obvious that a proper definition of "good" would have been able to provide the necessary clarity to avoid useless bickering.

Before pondering the nature of true "good" in the world, I must begin by first clearly defining "good." Using no philosophical pondering, I will simply define "good" as pleasure. Having done that, the definition of pleasure may need to be specified as well. However, some words are too basic to possibly be defined, and can easily be understood remaining undefined. The concept of "pleasure" seems like a good candidate for this category. In other words, pleasure is readily apparent when it is experienced, and no further definition is necessary. My definition of "good" has asserted that the experience associated with pleasure is exactly the same as that which should be associated with good. Therefore, in further philosophical debates, good and pleasure can be interchanged.

What makes this definition important? At first glance such a trivial definition seems to add nothing, and no debates are avoided by clarifying this point. However, the difference in context of the normal usage of these two words may lead some people to debate this definition. Although pleasure is readily apparent to everyone, "good" may be easily misconstrued as something else. Pleasure is usually used to describe more simple situations, but "good" is commonly used in more complicated ones. For this reason one rarely comes across an argument regarding the nature of pleasure, but arguments over sources of true good constantly abound. Once good has been defined to be completely inseparable from pleasure, more complicated situations can be analyzed, and agreements are easily attained.

Using this definition of "good," ask yourself some questions. Firstly, is it ever good for anyone to suffer? Before pondering any further, notice that suffering is the antithesis of pleasure. It becomes clear that deriving pleasure through suffering is a paradox, and it should never be good for someone to suffer. Secondly, can someone do “good” for someone else by doing something that he or she doesn't like? Again, if it is assumed that pleasure by definition is liked, and good by definition is pleasure, it is not possible for someone to derive pleasure from something that is not liked. Therefore, one would never be doing “good” for someone if the result is not something that the individual would like.

Although these results may seem counterintuitive and flawed, deeper analysis can lead to a resolution. When one describes a painful procedure as being good for the patient, he or she thinks the patient will have an overall net gain of pleasure from the benefits outweighing the negatives. In economics, the concept of maximizing intertemporal utility describes the nature of a person trying to gain the most pleasure over an entire lifetime. Although at times a decision may have painful repercussions, it is believed that an overall assessment of the future lifetime will be that of a net gain in pleasure. Similarly, when one decides what is good for another person, it is assumed the helping party feels that he or she possesses the knowledge for maximizing lifelong pleasure that the receiving party may lack. The word "good" still means pleasure, but the pleasure is presenting itself in a more complicated situation.

In the Jewish religion, a similar concept can be found when discussing the afterlife as a reward for fulfilling the Torah's laws. In the Jewish world view, all that is created is good. Therefore, if some things don’t seem pleasurable, they must be a result of an individual’s misdeed. Although this is a good attempt, there are still some evils in the world that seem to befall everyone, and very few people can truly testify that life was a pleasurable experience. To reconcile a good world with an unpleasant existence, an afterlife must exist in which reward is given to those who deserve it. This proof of the afterlife stems from the definition of good as that which is pleasurable, and the assumption that the world exists for the good of humans. The pleasure is relegated to the next world to explain the fact that most people don't enjoy themselves in this world.

Although people may disagree over the source of true good, it is important that both parties at least agree on the definition of good. This small clarification can lead people to agree on many more concepts than they originally thought.

Thoughts on TSA procedures

2010-11-19T15:00:00.000-05:00

Not everyone agrees that security trumps all. Some people would sacrifice their security for other agendas. The terrorists are willing to die in order to earn their reputation in the next world. Similarly, many people would take the risk of giving up their lives rather than being subjected to sexual abuse. Jewish law requires one to give up his life in order to avoid engagement in certain promiscuous acts. Although most people agree that security is an important matter, some people would rather take on the extra risks than being subjected to intrusive searches. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has decided that the measures being taken (though admittedly intrusive) are the appropriate course of action given the circumstance of today's threats. They have implicitly decided that these intrusive measures are still worthwhile if they will save lives. But how intrusive does a search have to be before it's too much?

I don't fly too much, but I can see how people would be frustrated with the new screening techniques. The Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) machines basically allow security personnel to see right through peoples' clothing. Although the images are supposed to be deleted immediately, hundreds of pictures have already turned up on the Internet. One is allowed to opt out of these machines, but the alternative is an almost invasive pat-down. Many stories of humiliated passengers have been flooding the Internet, and pictures of these pat-downs have made headlines. It doesn't seem like there are too many options for those who fly. Either use the AIT machine but risk your picture being on the Internet, or take a pat-down but risk humiliation. There must be a better solution to this problem than to subject people to these screening measures.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any method of screening for terrorists that could be less intrusive. If we are trying to avoid all terrorist attacks then we must subject everyone to a thorough search. Terrorist have shown that they can hide explosives anywhere in their bodies. We must remove our shoes because of the shoe bomber, and we must endure a pat-down because of the underwear bomber. It seems like security comes with a price tag, and we must all pay it if we want to avoid all possible threats. Imagine a passenger with an explosive in his or her underwear. During a pat-down, the explosive device would be felt by the agent and a further investigation would be warranted. The passenger would be cursing the TSA through the whole procedure for being treated in such a humiliating manner. Once caught however, it would be clear that the procedure was worthwhile. With every new terrorist attack we will be forced to devise more intrusive security measures. With subway bombing we would have to screen subway passengers. With car bombing we will have to screen automobile drivers. With more and more security measures we will continue to lose more and more of our freedom. If we are willing to pay anything for security eventually we will be paying everything.

Craigslist Scams

2010-11-08T22:35:00.000-05:00

When a normal person falls for a scam the reaction is one of dismay and depression. When I fall for a scam, I admire the creativity involved in the plot. Unfortunately, the experience also justifies my pessimistic outlook on human behavior, and I continue to lose faith in the goodness of humanity. Today, I didn't exactly fall for a scam, but I witnessed some very impressive and rather revolting tricks being orchestrated through craigslist.

Many people are desperate for jobs these days, and many other people have found methods of preying on others despair. A friend of mine had some success finding some unpaid internships through craigslist, and he convinced me that the site is a great place for finding work. After a casual search through the site, I noticed a job opening that looked very appealing. It involved office work, and it had a relatively high salary. I figured that it couldn't hurt to apply. After emailing a resume, I received a reply that looked very promising. But then a few hours later I received two more emails from a different email address. Something didn't seem right. The first email asked me to take an online IQ test, and then schedule an interview. The second email asked me to sign up to another job site in order to post my resume there. After going through the IQ test I was asked to give a phone number. I was about to sign-up for some mobile content for $10 a month. Needless to say, I didn't feel I needed mobile content. However, I did sign up for the job site given in the second email (I figured it couldn't hurt). I replied to the first email saying that I didn't feel that I needed mobile content, and I would like to schedule an interview. A few minutes later I receive another email from a different recruiter thanking me for submitting my resume and requesting that I check my credit score before scheduling an interview. Naturally, they were nice enough to give me a website with which to check my credit score (complete with a nice place to give my credit card information). I decided that I had better places to spend my money.

These scams are pure works of art. Who better to prey on than people desperate for jobs? The posting asking for a credit score was brilliant. I was asked to use their specific website so as not to have to spend money at other websites. The email also carefully instructed me not to send a complete copy of the results as that would divulge confidential information. I could see someone easily falling prey to such a beautiful scam. And the IQ test scam was brilliant as well. Just give us your score on this easy exam that you think makes you the perfect candidate for a nonexistent job. And sign up for some mobile content while you're at it. The brilliance behind these scams is truly worth noting. I love seeing creativity, and I wish I could have thought of such things.

Unfortunately, this kind of creativity is not making our world a better place. Just thinking that someone would try to scam people looking for work gives me stomach problems. Sometimes I resent the progress created with the advent of the Internet and technological advancement. To start, imagine a world without junk mail or spam. Can you picture a scribe of the good old days carefully scribbling spam for a mass mailing with the pony express? I think words were meaningful in those days. Today, I consider the Internet to be one big joke. The faster we can compute, the faster we can produce junk.

My Esrog Tree Is Now One Year Old!!!

2010-10-02T21:35:00.000-04:00

In case there was any confusion about the picture of a plant that occupies my profile, let me introduce to you my esrog tree. Last year my esrog was dissected and some esrog seeds were preserved on cotton. This process has been done for years, but I have never had any substantial results. This year the seeds finally germinated, and the result has been some very nice house plants, and some equally nice blog pictures. To celebrate the birthday of my tree, I have shared some of the pictures of the various stages of growth over the course of this year.

Also, there is another plant which sits on the other side of the window sill that is a younger brother to this one. Unfortunately, this plant suffers from Second Child Syndrome, and I don't have half as many pictures of it as I do of the first one. It was a little late to the game so it doesn't even get a birthday party.

Even if the second one suffers from SCS, at least it did not suffer the fate of the purple plant shown in some of the pictures above. My mother always hated that plant, and eventually it had to go.

Now you see it

Now you don't

Where did ebay get its name from?

2010-09-22T17:23:00.000-04:00

This could be a possible source!!!

Blackboard Laws Violated

2010-09-15T23:06:00.000-04:00

Among the prerequisites for being a successful teacher is successfully mastering the various codes of conduct that students consider acceptable teaching practices. One of these most basic codes is the following of the blackboard rules. I assume these rules are taught in your general Ph.D. program, and I would hope that teachers in a Ph.D. program would be well versed enough not to actually violate some of the most basic blackboard laws themselves. However, today I witnessed the 2nd blackboard law being violated twice. I am left wondering how many professors in the world are actually trained appropriately for blackboard use.

Because you may not be familiar with the blackboard laws, I have taken the liberty to provide the first two for your edification. The first law is simple and straight forward: Use the blackboard. As in every other subject, the first law is kind of obvious. However, I have been to a class in which the professor used nothing but a projector with illegible slides. Add to this the fact that she was just mumbling a few formulas and stories to herself, and I had for myself an unofficial self-study program. Most good professors adhere strictly to the first blackboard law, and I don't think any more emphasis is necessary.

The second law of blackboard states the maximum length for any given equation that can be written on one line. Although the formal statement of the law is beyond the scope of this essay, a concise explanation goes as follows: Don't write an equation on the board that can't be easily copied into the notes. The logic is simple. Anyone using a four by twenty foot blackboard has a large advantage over someone using a foot long piece of paper. Today, one of my professors violated the second law by writing an equation that stretched all the way across the top of the blackboard. What took him one line took me about three, and it will not be as easy for me to see the connection from one line to the next as it was for him to write such a monstrosity. I am hoping that there won't be a repeat performance of this practice in the future.

Although this was a serious violation, it pales in comparison to the violation that happened earlier in the day with the very same blackboard law. This violation was the worst such violation I had ever seen in my entire life. The following equation actually appeared on the blackboard in a real university classroom today.
If you are shocked by the size of this thing, please continue to be. I was more shocked to find out that this wasn't a joke. It took me a few minutes just to copy this one equation, and it took me another five minutes to figure out how to get a copy of it onto the blog. This equation is a clear violation of the second blackboard law. However, one of my fellow students was quick to defend the professor by claiming that this was not a very long equation. It was just a little tall. Although this is technically correct, it falls in the category of following the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law. The bottom line is (not sure which line I'm referring to), this equation is hard to write, and therefore it should not appear on a blackboard. I hope further violations will not occur in the future, and schools will be much safer for people that are scared of fractions.

So did you vote?

2010-09-14T19:54:00.000-04:00

Apparently there was a primary election today which I came very close to completely missing. I didn't realize there would be an election until I saw the signs instructing me to vote. When I came home my parents told me to vote for some Jewish guy because his automated phone call advertisements wished everyone a happy new year. I figured since there was probably such a low showing for these "secret" elections, now was my chance to put my candidate into office. When I asked my mother for any other tips, she instructed me to vote for such and such on the first column and the top one on the second column. As I walked to vote I focused on remembering those instructions.

When I arrived I was greeted with some surprises. The first thing I noticed was the lacking of those mechanical ballot boxes with big handle bars that were impossible to operate. After all these years of technological advancement, the ballot was finally ready to be electronicly converted. Alas the skill that took me years to master was now completely worthless. I couldn't think of another venue for utilizing my ballot box talents. The complicated ballot box would become nothing more than good stories to tell over to my future grandchildren.

The new voting process involves filling the bubbles of your favorite candidates, and watching your paper being eaten by a computer. Aside from the fact that the assistant can see who you voted for, I think this system is much better because it allows for people to vote faster. It's also nice to have a computer thank you for voting even if you didn't pick the correct answers. This actually brings me to the famous question: What are the correct answers? Who do you vote for?

The second surprise was closely related to this conundrum. When I received my ballot, I noticed that I had different choices than those of my parents. I was given the republican choices and my parents had been given the democrat choices. When I was younger I was brainwashed by some republican talk shows, and this caused me to fill in their bubble when registering to vote. However, I didn't realize the long-term consequences of that decision. Now I had no idea who to vote for. I began to have those feelings similar to the time when I had to take a Hebrew test, and I had to translate the English phrases into Hebrew words. I saw lots of names, but I had no real information.

Since the names were all I had, that was what I had to use. First I thought of choosing the names that sounded familiar, and in the event that none sounded familiar I would choose the name that sounded most American. But then I realized that the familiar names were familiar for a reason. Either I received way to many pieces of junk mail from them, or they manipulated my mind in some way that was not understood to me. Also, voting for the American name sounds like a very lame thing to do. I don't have an American name. Why should an American name decide anything? Instead I voted for those candidates without American names, and I specifically voted for those whose names I had never heard. I left feeling like I had actually voted (thanks to the "thank you" on the computer screen), but I was not sure if I had picked the correct answers. Fortunately, I was only voting for the Republican nominees, and in New York it is quite rare for a Republican to win anything.

Today's experience taught me how to vote properly. The process is quite simple. If you happen to know something about the candidates (if one happens to be your best friend) just vote for that magic one. But if you have no idea, try to vote in the most creative way possible. At least this way the results will be completely random, and all the candidates will get their equal share.

Wants and Needs

2010-09-07T14:16:00.000-04:00

Back in my undergraduate years I remember writing an essay on the topic of wants and needs. The essay was a term paper for an English Comp II class, and it required many sources some of which were provided by the college. The basic idea was to discuss the differences between wants and needs, and bring support from various Authors. My essay involved a discussion of the economic revolution during the 18th century, and I discussed whether or not the world is better off with the modern market systems. I use Robert Heilbronner's book, The Worldly Philosophers, as my main source. I wrote a nice essay that involved this topic, but I did not answer a fundamental question: What is the difference between wants and needs?

After giving the topic of wants and needs some thought today, the answer popped into my head. The difference between a want and a need involves the difference between first person and third person perspectives. In the world of the first person there is no difference between a want and a need. If I want something, my soul needs it. In the realm of third person, however, there is a distinction between wants and needs. If I were to look at another individual and try to decide what he wants, I could easily say that his wants are whatever he says he wants. However, if I were to try to figure out what he needs, I would make a judgment call about what I believe this individual should or should not have. In a sense, I can decide what other people need, and they can decide what they want.

A good example can be brought from some simple wants and needs. If I said I wanted food, I would need food as well. You may say that I need food as well. A person cannot live without food. However, implicit in this argument is the judgment that life is a need. If you were dealing with a murderer that was being given a lethal injection in a few hours you may not be inclined to consider food to be this person's need. After a judgment is made regarding an individuals need for life, a need for food must follow. However, I would need food whether you would value my life or not.

The Tapper

2010-08-28T21:46:00.001-04:00

Is this a leaf or a bug? From a distance it can be hard to tell if this thing is a vegetable or an insect. However, on closer examination, it is quite clear that we are looking at none other than the tapper himself. If you have ever walked outside at night during the summer in New York you would be familiar with the peculiar tapping sound that creates the orchestra along with the cricket chirps. But, you may not know where the tapping is coming from unless you have actually seen the culprit. Until now I was unaware of the nature of the tapper because it can easily camouflage itself into the backyard foliage. Luckily, one of the tappers had wandered from the backyard tribe, and ended up on the side door of my house. It seemed very unlikely to have a huge leaf growing out of the metal door, and I decided to take a closer look. Sure enough it was alive! If you happen to see a big leaf moving along your side door, don't be alarmed. It is just the tapper making its rounds.

The Freedom Fallacy

2010-05-05T23:14:00.001-04:00

The modern world has come to value freedom as a prominent virtue. When discussing how the world today shows a great improvement over previous generations it is fairly commonplace to extol the plethora of freedoms which modern society can take for granted but were generally lacking even a few hundred years ago. Freedom of expression and the freedom of opportunity are common ideals to the modern thinker. However, does the modern description of freedom really resemble the basic definition of the word?

To truly act in a free manner one must not have any restrictions. Indeed all proponents of freedom feel that they are breaking the shackles of the past restrictions, and empowering future generations with the ability to act in complete abandon. When analyzed critically, however, a logical flaw can be discovered in the modern rally for freedom. Before trying to mitigate restrictions, it is important to have an understanding of their cause. If there is a physical restriction or a divine decree that hampers human experiences, it is very logical to claim a gain in freedom from the removal of such obstacles. However, the picture becomes a lot less clear if one individual human's restrictions are brought about through another human. In this situation both people are exercising their own levels of freedom. In order to have freedom from restrictions in a world shared by many people it is also necessary for one individual to have the freedom to restrict another individual's freedom. To use an extreme example, even the harmless act of eating an apple can be thought of as restricting the freedom of everyone else from ever eating that particular apple. If human freedom by its very nature must cause human made restriction, the removal of human restriction cannot be considered a net increase in freedom for society.

Probing further, it becomes quite clear that the modern notion of additional freedom is a fallacy. If one person's freedom is another person's restriction, a rally for further freedoms must also be viewed as a rally for further restrictions. The rally itself is promoting what it claims to be avoiding. This idea becomes clearer when one notices that all freedoms are eventually earned by adding additional "laws" to the law books. A law is nothing more than a restriction. At most, the rally for freedom is a rally for the redistribution of freedom. Of course since the law makers are themselves exercising their own freedom by making the new rules, it cannot be claimed that they are necessarily adding net restrictions either. However, the claim that modern society has more freedom because it has more laws is a logical fallacy.

Knowledge Creates Nothing

2010-03-07T22:23:00.000-05:00

What is knowledge?

When I look at all that is around me I experience existence. I see many different things, and I experience many different experiences. But for some reason, it is not enough for me to just experience what is around me in this mundane manner. I need knowledge of this existence.

Now I am trying to seek knowledge of this knowledge. I want to know what knowledge is, and I want to know why knowledge is needed. After much pondering into this question, I discovered that I do not feel comfortable with existence. Something about things that exist does not sit well with me. Think of it this way: If there was "nothing" then there would be no questions. The who, what, when, where, how, and why would all have the same answer: Nothing. A nonexistence seems to sit well with me. But when I look at the world I see existence. I don't just see one existence; I see many "different" existences. Now the endless questions begin. It would be much simpler if there was just "nothing."

Knowledge seems to be the quest for "nothing" (not to be confused with a "quest for nothing"). If the perfect "nothing" is not here, I have to approximate it by minimizing the amount of existence. By finding patterns in existence, I realize that there is much less "different" than originally thought. For example, I realize that paper is nothing more than wood pulp that came from a tree. Now I know that all of the pieces of paper in the world are not categorically different. Rather, there is a tree and a logical rule. Essentially, it seems that knowledge is a process by which I can limit the amount of existence and create more good old "nothing."

I Finally Have a Blog Title!!!

2010-02-25T00:30:00.000-05:00

Everyone knows that the hardest part about starting an essay is coming up with the first few sentences. Similarly, the hardest part about starting a blog is figuring out what title to use. I don't claim that this truism applies to all people, and I don't think the first few bloggers had much trouble picking a nice creative title. But these days, with a saturation of bloggers on the Internet, creative people are forced to become superparamegaomegacreative. This is why it probably took me exponentially longer to think of a title than it took some other people, but I believe that I have finally been able to overcome this first obstacle.

After trying over a dozen superparacreative titles before realizing that most of the greatest titles were already taken (not to mention that they were already thought of as well), I decided to just be a little more normal. I didn't even intend to be acting superparamegacreative; I just made my blog address "normal." Of course, as can be expected in this normal world, "normal" was already taken. I then used a mathematical trick taken from my training in probability and statistics, and I changed my "normal" distribution or bell curve title into a "lognormal" distribution title. Unfortunately, others have already thought of taking the natural log of the "normal" title (I should have known that I am not the only one that knows that kind of math). I was forced to twist the title, and take it to the next level. As is done quite often in the "blog" titles, I added a "B" to the "lognormal" title. But this title didn't work either. It seems that "blognormal" is actually very normal. But then I took one last step. I decided that my blog would not be "blognormal" but "Ablognormal." At this point I seemed to have found some uncharted territory in the blogosphere, and I was very pleased with the discovery.

At this point I feel my title is either superparamegacreative, or it is just not normal.